Loading...
98-433�L CITY OF ST. PAUL • .! _ : JUJ' p lfll� ICptn �kY'131998 1 Zn the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: 598065 - East side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Laurel Ave and West side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Hague Ave 598066 - Both sides N Dunlap St from Sherburne Ave to Charles Ave and South side Charles Ave from N Griggs St to N Dunlap St 598067 - Both sides Selby Ave from N Milton St to N Victoria St 598068 - Both sides Thomas Ave from Farrinqton St to Marion St *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a £ive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot Por a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths wi11 be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square foot. A11 corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the £irst 15� £eet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the groperty. MULTS-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.b2 per square foot. The Council o£ the City of Saint Paul having received the report o£ the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1 That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, and that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. > That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th day of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearinq be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS as � Nays ✓ �B nanav ✓B�akey �ostrom ✓t,�oleman :/�arris ,�Lantry �eiter COUNCIL FILE NO &y �'r� File o. Vot' a War Adopted by Council: Certified Passed by -Y33 �� Date�� l0 Council Secretary i In Favor By � r � Against wo�� s�daW�ks �� �o y� y .� GREEN SHEET No. wmauoare n�nuuoa�_ For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 `-Q MAY�R(QRA5545TANi) nu s ov sic�unu� v►cES 1 _ tcu a u. �oc�noN roe acr uru� � nssocw� .M10N RE��E$TE� Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See ariacheti fist) Wi1NGCOMMU^SIDN �CIV0.5ERVICECOMMISSIDN COAiMRSEE VMICFI CWNCIL OBJ�TIVE? a Kcr. sFav�s IR��������t��l� PERSDNAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUS! ANSWER THE WLLOWING WESTIONS: 1. Has lfiis�� rtn ever xrorked uMer a cont+ac[ for Nis dePartmeM? EY S NO 2 Has this oer NO r hean a dry emqoyee? YE 3. Uoes fiis person/Brm possess a skdl not normalH possessed Ey any wnent dry employee? YES NO Expiain ail y�s answvrs on wparate sfiwt and attacb to grem afrt The problem "defective sidewalk' was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeRhaw cycles. service lite limits, chem'ical adddives, extreme temperature variaCwns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide levei and must be addressed and correded on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, tBe sidewalk cond'Aion woukf worsen to a state where ft xrould be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from fafls and possible litigations. The community will benefd from this project because R will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citize�s. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contiactors, so ii foltows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuk of this activity. Historicaliy, the sidewalk teconstructions have created negative fieedbadc in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesl assessmerrts, and despRe the fact up to one•haH the assessment is Gity subsidized, it stilf remains controversial. This option vrould albw the infrestructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorffie, which in turn, wil! c�enerate more personal_injury suits, ukimately resulting in the expenditure of larger doAar amounts in eventuai repairs and/ot replace'ment, as'well as claim payouts. Ca�ncA Researct� Cenret t�lAY 111998 RAL AfAOUNT OFSRANSACf10N S iNDINGSIXlRCE 98-H-066& MICIAL 1NFOflMATpN: (EXPLAIN) a V1 f�Ji � J6J C, Ci8 98 = 50 COSVREYENUE BUDGETED {CIRCLE ACI'fVRYNUMBER C '.. ". ONES �,� � a,o7sh^QQ�oa �L CITY OF ST. PAUL • .! _ : JUJ' p lfll� ICptn �kY'131998 1 Zn the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: 598065 - East side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Laurel Ave and West side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Hague Ave 598066 - Both sides N Dunlap St from Sherburne Ave to Charles Ave and South side Charles Ave from N Griggs St to N Dunlap St 598067 - Both sides Selby Ave from N Milton St to N Victoria St 598068 - Both sides Thomas Ave from Farrinqton St to Marion St *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a £ive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot Por a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths wi11 be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square foot. A11 corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the £irst 15� £eet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the groperty. MULTS-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.b2 per square foot. The Council o£ the City of Saint Paul having received the report o£ the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1 That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, and that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. > That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th day of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearinq be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS as � Nays ✓ �B nanav ✓B�akey �ostrom ✓t,�oleman :/�arris ,�Lantry �eiter COUNCIL FILE NO &y �'r� File o. Vot' a War Adopted by Council: Certified Passed by -Y33 �� Date�� l0 Council Secretary i In Favor By � r � Against wo�� s�daW�ks �� �o y� y .� GREEN SHEET No. wmauoare n�nuuoa�_ For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 `-Q MAY�R(QRA5545TANi) nu s ov sic�unu� v►cES 1 _ tcu a u. �oc�noN roe acr uru� � nssocw� .M10N RE��E$TE� Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See ariacheti fist) Wi1NGCOMMU^SIDN �CIV0.5ERVICECOMMISSIDN COAiMRSEE VMICFI CWNCIL OBJ�TIVE? a Kcr. sFav�s IR��������t��l� PERSDNAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUS! ANSWER THE WLLOWING WESTIONS: 1. Has lfiis�� rtn ever xrorked uMer a cont+ac[ for Nis dePartmeM? EY S NO 2 Has this oer NO r hean a dry emqoyee? YE 3. Uoes fiis person/Brm possess a skdl not normalH possessed Ey any wnent dry employee? YES NO Expiain ail y�s answvrs on wparate sfiwt and attacb to grem afrt The problem "defective sidewalk' was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeRhaw cycles. service lite limits, chem'ical adddives, extreme temperature variaCwns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide levei and must be addressed and correded on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, tBe sidewalk cond'Aion woukf worsen to a state where ft xrould be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from fafls and possible litigations. The community will benefd from this project because R will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citize�s. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contiactors, so ii foltows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuk of this activity. Historicaliy, the sidewalk teconstructions have created negative fieedbadc in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesl assessmerrts, and despRe the fact up to one•haH the assessment is Gity subsidized, it stilf remains controversial. This option vrould albw the infrestructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorffie, which in turn, wil! c�enerate more personal_injury suits, ukimately resulting in the expenditure of larger doAar amounts in eventuai repairs and/ot replace'ment, as'well as claim payouts. Ca�ncA Researct� Cenret t�lAY 111998 RAL AfAOUNT OFSRANSACf10N S iNDINGSIXlRCE 98-H-066& MICIAL 1NFOflMATpN: (EXPLAIN) a V1 f�Ji � J6J C, Ci8 98 = 50 COSVREYENUE BUDGETED {CIRCLE ACI'fVRYNUMBER C '.. ". ONES �,� � a,o7sh^QQ�oa �L CITY OF ST. PAUL • .! _ : JUJ' p lfll� ICptn �kY'131998 1 Zn the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: 598065 - East side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Laurel Ave and West side N Dale St from Ashland Ave to Hague Ave 598066 - Both sides N Dunlap St from Sherburne Ave to Charles Ave and South side Charles Ave from N Griggs St to N Dunlap St 598067 - Both sides Selby Ave from N Milton St to N Victoria St 598068 - Both sides Thomas Ave from Farrinqton St to Marion St *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.65 per front foot for a £ive (5) foot wide walk and $9.18 per front foot Por a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths wi11 be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.42 per square foot. A11 corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the £irst 15� £eet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the groperty. MULTS-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.b2 per square foot. The Council o£ the City of Saint Paul having received the report o£ the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1 That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, and that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. > That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24th day of June, 1998 at 5:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearinq be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS as � Nays ✓ �B nanav ✓B�akey �ostrom ✓t,�oleman :/�arris ,�Lantry �eiter COUNCIL FILE NO &y �'r� File o. Vot' a War Adopted by Council: Certified Passed by -Y33 �� Date�� l0 Council Secretary i In Favor By � r � Against wo�� s�daW�ks �� �o y� y .� GREEN SHEET No. wmauoare n�nuuoa�_ For Public Hearing on 6-24-98 `-Q MAY�R(QRA5545TANi) nu s ov sic�unu� v►cES 1 _ tcu a u. �oc�noN roe acr uru� � nssocw� .M10N RE��E$TE� Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See ariacheti fist) Wi1NGCOMMU^SIDN �CIV0.5ERVICECOMMISSIDN COAiMRSEE VMICFI CWNCIL OBJ�TIVE? a Kcr. sFav�s IR��������t��l� PERSDNAL SERVICE COMRACTS YUS! ANSWER THE WLLOWING WESTIONS: 1. Has lfiis�� rtn ever xrorked uMer a cont+ac[ for Nis dePartmeM? EY S NO 2 Has this oer NO r hean a dry emqoyee? YE 3. Uoes fiis person/Brm possess a skdl not normalH possessed Ey any wnent dry employee? YES NO Expiain ail y�s answvrs on wparate sfiwt and attacb to grem afrt The problem "defective sidewalk' was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, afternating freeRhaw cycles. service lite limits, chem'ical adddives, extreme temperature variaCwns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide levei and must be addressed and correded on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, tBe sidewalk cond'Aion woukf worsen to a state where ft xrould be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from fafls and possible litigations. The community will benefd from this project because R will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citize�s. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contiactors, so ii foltows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuk of this activity. Historicaliy, the sidewalk teconstructions have created negative fieedbadc in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesl assessmerrts, and despRe the fact up to one•haH the assessment is Gity subsidized, it stilf remains controversial. This option vrould albw the infrestructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorffie, which in turn, wil! c�enerate more personal_injury suits, ukimately resulting in the expenditure of larger doAar amounts in eventuai repairs and/ot replace'ment, as'well as claim payouts. Ca�ncA Researct� Cenret t�lAY 111998 RAL AfAOUNT OFSRANSACf10N S iNDINGSIXlRCE 98-H-066& MICIAL 1NFOflMATpN: (EXPLAIN) a V1 f�Ji � J6J C, Ci8 98 = 50 COSVREYENUE BUDGETED {CIRCLE ACI'fVRYNUMBER C '.. ". ONES �,� � a,o7sh^QQ�oa