Loading...
98-431LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at couNC No. —y3/ By File No, 598 0 Voting Ward 2 the following locatians: S98050 - Both sides E Robie St from Bancro£t Avenue to approximately 240 feet east of BancroPt Ave. *BSTIMATED 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) £oot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square £oot. 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; 100o of actual cost estimated to be approximately 54.62 per square foot. 2� The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of tiLe Mayor upon the above imgrovement, 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 of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of said gublic 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 � p����Ct +/�lakey � 13 999� �/�ostrom �lemar i/�aTris �In Favor ✓Lantry �iter �Against Adopted by Council: Date �^<, � `�� Certified Passed by Council 5ecretary By Mayor _ ��� nearing Date - June 24, 1998 cPAA7MENS/OGFICHCOINJCiL vbiic Works Sidewalks i:�i+rs�,� For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 RE 5-8-98 ��j `�3� GREEN SHEET r,o. g�$2 mmnuon� wrruwn� g�„���� g���� � BUOGETDIRECTOR FIN.61AG7. SEflY10ES OIR. � MFYOR {OR A5SiSTAN7) i COUnCiI R2522tCh OF SIGNAT4RE PAGES _ 1 _{CllP ALL LOCAt10NS FOR S{GXpTURE) � ASSOCIA7E �.BE7A'�St�fTAL Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached fist) � iMUENDA7iOw: Mwa'a W a Aeiea i� PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUST ANSWER THE FOILOWING QUESTIONS: PLPNNMG GOMMtSS10N CNq. SEFVICE COMAi1SSiON 7. Has ihis���y� im Bvet woiked uiM6t a ConV3C[ fOr thls dep.1M10nt? — EV 5 ND qg ppyM� 2. Has ihis rtn ever been e �ity employee? — ES NO 57nFF 3. Dces mts personrfirm possess a skin not mrma�ry possessed by arry mrtent dry amployee? OtSTrt�GicauMCa M.'M.T^ �p�inally s ITIATiNG Pfl06LEM, i53UE� OPPOqNNiSY (WelO. WHAT. WHEN, WHEAE, WHY): The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeflhaw cycles, service i'rfe limi�, chemicai additives, e�ctreme tamperature variations, etc. These probfems occur on a c8ywide level and must be addressed and corcected cn an annual trasis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wculd worsen to a siate where it wouid be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. The community wiii benefft fram this project because it wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for fls many c'rtizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it fotlows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ofi this activity. iADVANTAGE$ IFAPPROVFD: Historically, tfie sidewaik reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of cronstruction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owners detest assessments, and desp8e the fact up io one-haif the assessment is City subsidized, it still remains controversial. This option would ai{ow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suiis, uRimately resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and�orr�5laceifi��t, as W§il as ciairri"payouts. Co�x�tl ResQan� Center , � ,;; TOTAL AMWM OF TRANSACTION S FUNDItiGSWFiCE 9g"�^��76� 9NANC4LL INFORMATION: (EXPlAtA9 B, A5T � 325 c, Crs 98 = So,aoo COSVREVENUE 9UDGETED (CIBCLE ONEJ acmmrNUe�aes C98-2775�-( YES NO t-QDOOD LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at couNC No. —y3/ By File No, 598 0 Voting Ward 2 the following locatians: S98050 - Both sides E Robie St from Bancro£t Avenue to approximately 240 feet east of BancroPt Ave. *BSTIMATED 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) £oot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square £oot. 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; 100o of actual cost estimated to be approximately 54.62 per square foot. 2� The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of tiLe Mayor upon the above imgrovement, 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 of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of said gublic 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 � p����Ct +/�lakey � 13 999� �/�ostrom �lemar i/�aTris �In Favor ✓Lantry �iter �Against Adopted by Council: Date �^<, � `�� Certified Passed by Council 5ecretary By Mayor _ ��� nearing Date - June 24, 1998 cPAA7MENS/OGFICHCOINJCiL vbiic Works Sidewalks i:�i+rs�,� For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 RE 5-8-98 ��j `�3� GREEN SHEET r,o. g�$2 mmnuon� wrruwn� g�„���� g���� � BUOGETDIRECTOR FIN.61AG7. SEflY10ES OIR. � MFYOR {OR A5SiSTAN7) i COUnCiI R2522tCh OF SIGNAT4RE PAGES _ 1 _{CllP ALL LOCAt10NS FOR S{GXpTURE) � ASSOCIA7E �.BE7A'�St�fTAL Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached fist) � iMUENDA7iOw: Mwa'a W a Aeiea i� PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUST ANSWER THE FOILOWING QUESTIONS: PLPNNMG GOMMtSS10N CNq. SEFVICE COMAi1SSiON 7. Has ihis���y� im Bvet woiked uiM6t a ConV3C[ fOr thls dep.1M10nt? — EV 5 ND qg ppyM� 2. Has ihis rtn ever been e �ity employee? — ES NO 57nFF 3. Dces mts personrfirm possess a skin not mrma�ry possessed by arry mrtent dry amployee? OtSTrt�GicauMCa M.'M.T^ �p�inally s ITIATiNG Pfl06LEM, i53UE� OPPOqNNiSY (WelO. WHAT. WHEN, WHEAE, WHY): The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeflhaw cycles, service i'rfe limi�, chemicai additives, e�ctreme tamperature variations, etc. These probfems occur on a c8ywide level and must be addressed and corcected cn an annual trasis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wculd worsen to a siate where it wouid be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. The community wiii benefft fram this project because it wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for fls many c'rtizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it fotlows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ofi this activity. iADVANTAGE$ IFAPPROVFD: Historically, tfie sidewaik reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of cronstruction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owners detest assessments, and desp8e the fact up io one-haif the assessment is City subsidized, it still remains controversial. This option would ai{ow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suiis, uRimately resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and�orr�5laceifi��t, as W§il as ciairri"payouts. Co�x�tl ResQan� Center , � ,;; TOTAL AMWM OF TRANSACTION S FUNDItiGSWFiCE 9g"�^��76� 9NANC4LL INFORMATION: (EXPlAtA9 B, A5T � 325 c, Crs 98 = So,aoo COSVREVENUE 9UDGETED (CIBCLE ONEJ acmmrNUe�aes C98-2775�-( YES NO t-QDOOD LL CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at couNC No. —y3/ By File No, 598 0 Voting Ward 2 the following locatians: S98050 - Both sides E Robie St from Bancro£t Avenue to approximately 240 feet east of BancroPt Ave. *BSTIMATED 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) £oot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square £oot. 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; 100o of actual cost estimated to be approximately 54.62 per square foot. 2� The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of tiLe Mayor upon the above imgrovement, 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 of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. 3 That notice of said gublic 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 � p����Ct +/�lakey � 13 999� �/�ostrom �lemar i/�aTris �In Favor ✓Lantry �iter �Against Adopted by Council: Date �^<, � `�� Certified Passed by Council 5ecretary By Mayor _ ��� nearing Date - June 24, 1998 cPAA7MENS/OGFICHCOINJCiL vbiic Works Sidewalks i:�i+rs�,� For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 RE 5-8-98 ��j `�3� GREEN SHEET r,o. g�$2 mmnuon� wrruwn� g�„���� g���� � BUOGETDIRECTOR FIN.61AG7. SEflY10ES OIR. � MFYOR {OR A5SiSTAN7) i COUnCiI R2522tCh OF SIGNAT4RE PAGES _ 1 _{CllP ALL LOCAt10NS FOR S{GXpTURE) � ASSOCIA7E �.BE7A'�St�fTAL Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached fist) � iMUENDA7iOw: Mwa'a W a Aeiea i� PERSONAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUST ANSWER THE FOILOWING QUESTIONS: PLPNNMG GOMMtSS10N CNq. SEFVICE COMAi1SSiON 7. Has ihis���y� im Bvet woiked uiM6t a ConV3C[ fOr thls dep.1M10nt? — EV 5 ND qg ppyM� 2. Has ihis rtn ever been e �ity employee? — ES NO 57nFF 3. Dces mts personrfirm possess a skin not mrma�ry possessed by arry mrtent dry amployee? OtSTrt�GicauMCa M.'M.T^ �p�inally s ITIATiNG Pfl06LEM, i53UE� OPPOqNNiSY (WelO. WHAT. WHEN, WHEAE, WHY): The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeflhaw cycles, service i'rfe limi�, chemicai additives, e�ctreme tamperature variations, etc. These probfems occur on a c8ywide level and must be addressed and corcected cn an annual trasis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wculd worsen to a siate where it wouid be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. The community wiii benefft fram this project because it wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for fls many c'rtizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it fotlows that private sector jobs are created as a resuft ofi this activity. iADVANTAGE$ IFAPPROVFD: Historically, tfie sidewaik reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of cronstruction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owners detest assessments, and desp8e the fact up io one-haif the assessment is City subsidized, it still remains controversial. This option would ai{ow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suiis, uRimately resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and�orr�5laceifi��t, as W§il as ciairri"payouts. Co�x�tl ResQan� Center , � ,;; TOTAL AMWM OF TRANSACTION S FUNDItiGSWFiCE 9g"�^��76� 9NANC4LL INFORMATION: (EXPlAtA9 B, A5T � 325 c, Crs 98 = So,aoo COSVREVENUE 9UDGETED (CIBCLE ONEJ acmmrNUe�aes C98-2775�-( YES NO t-QDOOD