Loading...
98-251�� CITY OF ST. PAIIL ORDER Ia the Matter of ORiGINAL COUNCI F LE NO. \a ��5� �'1 �S B tv7�� Fi1e No. 595001-598003 Voting Ward 6 598001 - Sidewalk reconstruction on both sides Hazelwood St from E Arlington Ave to E Nebraska Ave. SR�o� 538-�82 - Sidewalk reconstruction on north side of E Idaho Ave from Birmingham St to Manton St. 598003 - Sidewalk reconstruction on the west side of N White Bear Ave from Stillwater Ave to North 12 ft & the south side of Stillwater Ave from N White Bear Ave to West 50 ft at 877 N White Bear Ave on1y. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 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. MLTLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 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 1998 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 27th day of May, 1998, at 5:30 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 ✓Benanav ✓ 3�1 akey ,/�ostrom �C ���� ,hTarris qp� �5199� �ntry ,�R�iter : » . . � � _. aanaiiwia Adopted by Council: Date���j Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � Against Mayor �r.� Public Hearing Date - Ma 27, 1998 RE 3-20-98 .17C �DcPARTMENT/OFfICFJCOUNCIL DATEINRIRiED GREEN SHEET No.38574 Public Works Sidewalks 3-5-98 wiTi,�A� WRIAL/DATE CONUCTPEFiSON6PHONE �pQ+pq7�AENTDIRECTOR �CfiYCOUNCIL LarryH.lueth-26E6083 ��N �crtr�rrow�r ❑cmaEaK xuwsatron MUST BE ON COUNCU. AGENDA BY (DAT� [�_8_9 $ �q O g�pGE7 DIflECTOR � FIN. d MGT. SERVN:ES DIF Must be in C nc'1 Research Of£ice �AIAYON(ORASSISTANT) a(�'p{��p� Research TOTAL t OF SIGNATURE PAGES - - 1 _(CLJV ALL LOCA710tiS FOH SIGXJINHE) �/SSOCIATE 7MENTAL ACCOUNfANT ACTION RE«,ESh� _ - _ 3y 1, � i Reconstruct SidewaAc in Ward 6(See attached list) , _ s _ oo� �S-a5I RECOMMENDATIONS: k+0'� (N or Hejert (fi) PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWINC �UESTIOHS: PLANNING COMMISSION CIVIL SEfiVICE COYMISSION t. Has U�ib rm ever worked uMer a Contract for this dBpartrnent? — — ES NO CIB CoM4177EE 2. Has ihisp��� rm ever been a dry emplCJee? — — EY S NO A SiAFF 3. Does thia persoNfirtn possess a sltill notrormalN poasessed by arry aircentdty amployee7 WSiHic7COUNCiL YES NO SUPPOP75 YMICH CWNC�I OBJECTNE7 �W+�n aIl y�s �nsw�rs en up�reb Mwt and attaeh to grwn sh�st NJRNTIM(i PROBLEM, �SSUE.OPPORNNtTV (WNO. WNAT, WNEN, WHERE, WNY�: The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, aRernating freerthaw cycles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additives, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oocur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected 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 falis and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFRPPROVED: The communRy will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for i[s many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are eat��}as��c�t�qf�liis^�ivity. ��L:�?i'�. n-r�:� �,�� 2 01998 DISADVANTAGES IF APPHOVED: Histor'icaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construdion procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detest assessments, and despfte the fad up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, d still remains controversial. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ukimately resuking in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. TOTALAMIXJHTOFTRANSAGTIONS 8:384.40 COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES NO FUNDBJG SWflCE 98-M-0668 A , P tA 9$ ° 6 � 8 � ��� pCITVfTY NUMBEN C 8—'L �— — FINANCIAL NJFORMATION: (EXPU11t� B� AST � 325 �.000 C, Ct8 9S = 50,000 �� CITY OF ST. PAIIL ORDER Ia the Matter of ORiGINAL COUNCI F LE NO. \a ��5� �'1 �S B tv7�� Fi1e No. 595001-598003 Voting Ward 6 598001 - Sidewalk reconstruction on both sides Hazelwood St from E Arlington Ave to E Nebraska Ave. SR�o� 538-�82 - Sidewalk reconstruction on north side of E Idaho Ave from Birmingham St to Manton St. 598003 - Sidewalk reconstruction on the west side of N White Bear Ave from Stillwater Ave to North 12 ft & the south side of Stillwater Ave from N White Bear Ave to West 50 ft at 877 N White Bear Ave on1y. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 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. MLTLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 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 1998 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 27th day of May, 1998, at 5:30 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 ✓Benanav ✓ 3�1 akey ,/�ostrom �C ���� ,hTarris qp� �5199� �ntry ,�R�iter : » . . � � _. aanaiiwia Adopted by Council: Date���j Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � Against Mayor �r.� Public Hearing Date - Ma 27, 1998 RE 3-20-98 .17C �DcPARTMENT/OFfICFJCOUNCIL DATEINRIRiED GREEN SHEET No.38574 Public Works Sidewalks 3-5-98 wiTi,�A� WRIAL/DATE CONUCTPEFiSON6PHONE �pQ+pq7�AENTDIRECTOR �CfiYCOUNCIL LarryH.lueth-26E6083 ��N �crtr�rrow�r ❑cmaEaK xuwsatron MUST BE ON COUNCU. AGENDA BY (DAT� [�_8_9 $ �q O g�pGE7 DIflECTOR � FIN. d MGT. SERVN:ES DIF Must be in C nc'1 Research Of£ice �AIAYON(ORASSISTANT) a(�'p{��p� Research TOTAL t OF SIGNATURE PAGES - - 1 _(CLJV ALL LOCA710tiS FOH SIGXJINHE) �/SSOCIATE 7MENTAL ACCOUNfANT ACTION RE«,ESh� _ - _ 3y 1, � i Reconstruct SidewaAc in Ward 6(See attached list) , _ s _ oo� �S-a5I RECOMMENDATIONS: k+0'� (N or Hejert (fi) PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWINC �UESTIOHS: PLANNING COMMISSION CIVIL SEfiVICE COYMISSION t. Has U�ib rm ever worked uMer a Contract for this dBpartrnent? — — ES NO CIB CoM4177EE 2. Has ihisp��� rm ever been a dry emplCJee? — — EY S NO A SiAFF 3. Does thia persoNfirtn possess a sltill notrormalN poasessed by arry aircentdty amployee7 WSiHic7COUNCiL YES NO SUPPOP75 YMICH CWNC�I OBJECTNE7 �W+�n aIl y�s �nsw�rs en up�reb Mwt and attaeh to grwn sh�st NJRNTIM(i PROBLEM, �SSUE.OPPORNNtTV (WNO. WNAT, WNEN, WHERE, WNY�: The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, aRernating freerthaw cycles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additives, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oocur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected 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 falis and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFRPPROVED: The communRy will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for i[s many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are eat��}as��c�t�qf�liis^�ivity. ��L:�?i'�. n-r�:� �,�� 2 01998 DISADVANTAGES IF APPHOVED: Histor'icaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construdion procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detest assessments, and despfte the fad up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, d still remains controversial. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ukimately resuking in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. TOTALAMIXJHTOFTRANSAGTIONS 8:384.40 COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES NO FUNDBJG SWflCE 98-M-0668 A , P tA 9$ ° 6 � 8 � ��� pCITVfTY NUMBEN C 8—'L �— — FINANCIAL NJFORMATION: (EXPU11t� B� AST � 325 �.000 C, Ct8 9S = 50,000 �� CITY OF ST. PAIIL ORDER Ia the Matter of ORiGINAL COUNCI F LE NO. \a ��5� �'1 �S B tv7�� Fi1e No. 595001-598003 Voting Ward 6 598001 - Sidewalk reconstruction on both sides Hazelwood St from E Arlington Ave to E Nebraska Ave. SR�o� 538-�82 - Sidewalk reconstruction on north side of E Idaho Ave from Birmingham St to Manton St. 598003 - Sidewalk reconstruction on the west side of N White Bear Ave from Stillwater Ave to North 12 ft & the south side of Stillwater Ave from N White Bear Ave to West 50 ft at 877 N White Bear Ave on1y. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 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. MLTLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 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 1998 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 27th day of May, 1998, at 5:30 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 ✓Benanav ✓ 3�1 akey ,/�ostrom �C ���� ,hTarris qp� �5199� �ntry ,�R�iter : » . . � � _. aanaiiwia Adopted by Council: Date���j Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � Against Mayor �r.� Public Hearing Date - Ma 27, 1998 RE 3-20-98 .17C �DcPARTMENT/OFfICFJCOUNCIL DATEINRIRiED GREEN SHEET No.38574 Public Works Sidewalks 3-5-98 wiTi,�A� WRIAL/DATE CONUCTPEFiSON6PHONE �pQ+pq7�AENTDIRECTOR �CfiYCOUNCIL LarryH.lueth-26E6083 ��N �crtr�rrow�r ❑cmaEaK xuwsatron MUST BE ON COUNCU. AGENDA BY (DAT� [�_8_9 $ �q O g�pGE7 DIflECTOR � FIN. d MGT. SERVN:ES DIF Must be in C nc'1 Research Of£ice �AIAYON(ORASSISTANT) a(�'p{��p� Research TOTAL t OF SIGNATURE PAGES - - 1 _(CLJV ALL LOCA710tiS FOH SIGXJINHE) �/SSOCIATE 7MENTAL ACCOUNfANT ACTION RE«,ESh� _ - _ 3y 1, � i Reconstruct SidewaAc in Ward 6(See attached list) , _ s _ oo� �S-a5I RECOMMENDATIONS: k+0'� (N or Hejert (fi) PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWINC �UESTIOHS: PLANNING COMMISSION CIVIL SEfiVICE COYMISSION t. Has U�ib rm ever worked uMer a Contract for this dBpartrnent? — — ES NO CIB CoM4177EE 2. Has ihisp��� rm ever been a dry emplCJee? — — EY S NO A SiAFF 3. Does thia persoNfirtn possess a sltill notrormalN poasessed by arry aircentdty amployee7 WSiHic7COUNCiL YES NO SUPPOP75 YMICH CWNC�I OBJECTNE7 �W+�n aIl y�s �nsw�rs en up�reb Mwt and attaeh to grwn sh�st NJRNTIM(i PROBLEM, �SSUE.OPPORNNtTV (WNO. WNAT, WNEN, WHERE, WNY�: The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, aRernating freerthaw cycles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additives, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oocur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected 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 falis and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFRPPROVED: The communRy will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for i[s many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are eat��}as��c�t�qf�liis^�ivity. ��L:�?i'�. n-r�:� �,�� 2 01998 DISADVANTAGES IF APPHOVED: Histor'icaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construdion procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detest assessments, and despfte the fad up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, d still remains controversial. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ukimately resuking in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. TOTALAMIXJHTOFTRANSAGTIONS 8:384.40 COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES NO FUNDBJG SWflCE 98-M-0668 A , P tA 9$ ° 6 � 8 � ��� pCITVfTY NUMBEN C 8—'L �— — FINANCIAL NJFORMATION: (EXPU11t� B� AST � 325 �.000 C, Ct8 9S = 50,000