The URL can be used to link to this page

98-430� LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELII�SINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at ��P(IRilCN�+ -p�13199� 598047 - Both sides E Cook Avenue Prom Eorest St to Cypress St 598048 - Both sides Forest St from E Cook Ave to E Jessamine Ave and North side E Cook Avenue from Mendota St to Forest St 598049 - North side E Maryland Avenue Prom Payne Ave to Greenbrier St. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures} Reconstruction (replacement o£ old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front £oot £or a Eive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot £or a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately 53.42 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 per square foot. Z� 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 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_ 2 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th dav of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers oP the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of saici 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 eas � Nays ✓Benanav �akey �strom ✓C�o 1 eman +/ffarris �La try eiter COUNC L FI E NO. 9(� By Fi e o. 98047 thru 598049 Voting Ward 6 the following loca.tions: Adopted by Cauncil: Date ��j \°�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By �r..-„��;.�1 �Against Mayor � __ ��a�in¢ Date - wo�� s�aaw�ks GREEN SHEET �NO 38580 � arry H. Luelh - 26fr6083 nsacN `'' cm arrow�v NUNBERPQR �USTBEONCOUNCILAGENOABY(DAYE) S'ZO'9H pORDFA ❑BUDGETOIflEGTOR For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 �MAYOfl(OFASSfSTMiT) DTAf. t OF 81GlUNRE PAGES I. _(CLJP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANflE� � ASCaOCWTE C71ON REOUE57ED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 2(See attached list) STAFf b MGT. SERYICES "°" �^' PERSONAL SERYtCE CONTRACTS MU5T ANSYYER THE F011AWING QUESTIONS: Crva SERViCE CordNtSSroN t. Has this rm ever woricep unEer a conVac[ ior Mis department? — ES NO 2 Has this pers�rtn ever bee� a dty employee? — YES NO 3. Dces this peraMirm possess a sttill twt rwmially possessed by arry wrcent ciry — employea? YES NO �� EzpWin all yas anawen on saparata shaat and attaehtc gnan sMot lrwTMK. PROBIEM. 755UE. OPPOqTUNfiV �WHO. MMAT. WHEN. WHERE. YMY): The probiem "defective sidewaik" was created 6ecausa of tree roots, deleterwus subgrade material, aRematiog freefthaw cycles, service I'rfe limds, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annuat basis, Left u�corrected, th� sidewalk coadition woutd worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falfs and possible {digations. The community will benefit from this project because ft wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for Hs many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, sa it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ot this activity. Nistci�catly, the sidewalk reoonstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simpy stated, property owners detest assessmenis, and despRe the fact up to one-haH the assessment is City subsidized, ft still remains controversiaf. This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewafk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal iajury suits, uftimately resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in evertual repairs and/or ceplacement, as weli as claim payouis. _ — . --...t;._;e�.>.. ___— Ca�rx� Research Center YfAL AlAWM OFTRAtiSACT10N S 1NDWGSWHCE � E^�^OE76H iANCiAL INFORMATIpN: (EXPLAIN) C�STIREVENUE BUDGETEO {ClRCIE ONE) ncmmNU�eeeR C98-2T7`s�-f f! �7 MAY 11 i99� �t nv� - >c7 t; cts 98 = 5otoa0 � LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELII�SINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at ��P(IRilCN�+ -p�13199� 598047 - Both sides E Cook Avenue Prom Eorest St to Cypress St 598048 - Both sides Forest St from E Cook Ave to E Jessamine Ave and North side E Cook Avenue from Mendota St to Forest St 598049 - North side E Maryland Avenue Prom Payne Ave to Greenbrier St. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures} Reconstruction (replacement o£ old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front £oot £or a Eive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot £or a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately 53.42 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 per square foot. Z� 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 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_ 2 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th dav of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers oP the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of saici 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 eas � Nays ✓Benanav �akey �strom ✓C�o 1 eman +/ffarris �La try eiter COUNC L FI E NO. 9(� By Fi e o. 98047 thru 598049 Voting Ward 6 the following loca.tions: Adopted by Cauncil: Date ��j \°�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By �r..-„��;.�1 �Against Mayor � __ ��a�in¢ Date - wo�� s�aaw�ks GREEN SHEET �NO 38580 � arry H. Luelh - 26fr6083 nsacN `'' cm arrow�v NUNBERPQR �USTBEONCOUNCILAGENOABY(DAYE) S'ZO'9H pORDFA ❑BUDGETOIflEGTOR For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 �MAYOfl(OFASSfSTMiT) DTAf. t OF 81GlUNRE PAGES I. _(CLJP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANflE� � ASCaOCWTE C71ON REOUE57ED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 2(See attached list) STAFf b MGT. SERYICES "°" �^' PERSONAL SERYtCE CONTRACTS MU5T ANSYYER THE F011AWING QUESTIONS: Crva SERViCE CordNtSSroN t. Has this rm ever woricep unEer a conVac[ ior Mis department? — ES NO 2 Has this pers�rtn ever bee� a dty employee? — YES NO 3. Dces this peraMirm possess a sttill twt rwmially possessed by arry wrcent ciry — employea? YES NO �� EzpWin all yas anawen on saparata shaat and attaehtc gnan sMot lrwTMK. PROBIEM. 755UE. OPPOqTUNfiV �WHO. MMAT. WHEN. WHERE. YMY): The probiem "defective sidewaik" was created 6ecausa of tree roots, deleterwus subgrade material, aRematiog freefthaw cycles, service I'rfe limds, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annuat basis, Left u�corrected, th� sidewalk coadition woutd worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falfs and possible {digations. The community will benefit from this project because ft wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for Hs many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, sa it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ot this activity. Nistci�catly, the sidewalk reoonstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simpy stated, property owners detest assessmenis, and despRe the fact up to one-haH the assessment is City subsidized, ft still remains controversiaf. This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewafk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal iajury suits, uftimately resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in evertual repairs and/or ceplacement, as weli as claim payouis. _ — . --...t;._;e�.>.. ___— Ca�rx� Research Center YfAL AlAWM OFTRAtiSACT10N S 1NDWGSWHCE � E^�^OE76H iANCiAL INFORMATIpN: (EXPLAIN) C�STIREVENUE BUDGETEO {ClRCIE ONE) ncmmNU�eeeR C98-2T7`s�-f f! �7 MAY 11 i99� �t nv� - >c7 t; cts 98 = 5otoa0 � LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELII�SINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at ��P(IRilCN�+ -p�13199� 598047 - Both sides E Cook Avenue Prom Eorest St to Cypress St 598048 - Both sides Forest St from E Cook Ave to E Jessamine Ave and North side E Cook Avenue from Mendota St to Forest St 598049 - North side E Maryland Avenue Prom Payne Ave to Greenbrier St. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures} Reconstruction (replacement o£ old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front £oot £or a Eive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot £or a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately 53.42 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.62 per square foot. Z� 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 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_ 2 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th dav of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers oP the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of saici 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 eas � Nays ✓Benanav �akey �strom ✓C�o 1 eman +/ffarris �La try eiter COUNC L FI E NO. 9(� By Fi e o. 98047 thru 598049 Voting Ward 6 the following loca.tions: Adopted by Cauncil: Date ��j \°�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By �r..-„��;.�1 �Against Mayor � __ ��a�in¢ Date - wo�� s�aaw�ks GREEN SHEET �NO 38580 � arry H. Luelh - 26fr6083 nsacN `'' cm arrow�v NUNBERPQR �USTBEONCOUNCILAGENOABY(DAYE) S'ZO'9H pORDFA ❑BUDGETOIflEGTOR For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 �MAYOfl(OFASSfSTMiT) DTAf. t OF 81GlUNRE PAGES I. _(CLJP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANflE� � ASCaOCWTE C71ON REOUE57ED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 2(See attached list) STAFf b MGT. SERYICES "°" �^' PERSONAL SERYtCE CONTRACTS MU5T ANSYYER THE F011AWING QUESTIONS: Crva SERViCE CordNtSSroN t. Has this rm ever woricep unEer a conVac[ ior Mis department? — ES NO 2 Has this pers�rtn ever bee� a dty employee? — YES NO 3. Dces this peraMirm possess a sttill twt rwmially possessed by arry wrcent ciry — employea? YES NO �� EzpWin all yas anawen on saparata shaat and attaehtc gnan sMot lrwTMK. PROBIEM. 755UE. OPPOqTUNfiV �WHO. MMAT. WHEN. WHERE. YMY): The probiem "defective sidewaik" was created 6ecausa of tree roots, deleterwus subgrade material, aRematiog freefthaw cycles, service I'rfe limds, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annuat basis, Left u�corrected, th� sidewalk coadition woutd worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falfs and possible {digations. The community will benefit from this project because ft wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for Hs many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, sa it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ot this activity. Nistci�catly, the sidewalk reoonstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simpy stated, property owners detest assessmenis, and despRe the fact up to one-haH the assessment is City subsidized, ft still remains controversiaf. This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewafk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal iajury suits, uftimately resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in evertual repairs and/or ceplacement, as weli as claim payouis. _ — . --...t;._;e�.>.. ___— Ca�rx� Research Center YfAL AlAWM OFTRAtiSACT10N S 1NDWGSWHCE � E^�^OE76H iANCiAL INFORMATIpN: (EXPLAIN) C�STIREVENUE BUDGETEO {ClRCIE ONE) ncmmNU�eeeR C98-2T7`s�-f f! �7 MAY 11 i99� �t nv� - >c7 t; cts 98 = 5otoa0