Loading...
99-413v CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER �ro�re�sn �iAY 29 1999 COUNCIL FILE NO. _ BY � File o._S99 J 5 - Voting Ward 1 °t9-'-k �'PZ'L! In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: � 599055 - Both sides Edmund Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. S99056 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Charles Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599057 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Thomas Avenue to Como Avenue S99058 - Both sides North Griggs Street £rom Lafond Avenue to Blair Avenue & East side North Griggs Street from Thomas Avenue to Lafond Avenue. 599059 - East side North Hamline Avenue from Sherbuxne Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599060 - Both sides Lafond Avenue from Farrington Street to Elfelt Street. 594061 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from Edmund Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599062 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from La£ond Avenue to Blair Avenue. 599063 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from West Minnehaha Avenue to Seminary Avenue. 599064 - Both sides Thomas Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. qq -�I l3 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Nem construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. Al1 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; 100g of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, � that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. 2 3 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 9t" dav of June, 1999 5:30 o'clock P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas / Nays ✓$enanav ✓Blakey Bostrom.. �a�o Co 1 eman - {�hs �,,,.� Harris � (ahsc,-�� ✓Lantsy ✓�eiter PIIAi i.StiFh MAX 29 1999 y In Favor � Against � AbS�w� Adopted by Council: Date l,`1 � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By C:� /m�L� � % Mayor 'y � t'u�u� t�ilA� �v ury.� � 1�j7`! '� y- lta- `1� � qq-M I� DEPARiMEM/OFFlCN�WNGL ATE INRIA7ED PublicWorksSidewalks -5-99 GREEN SHEET No. � ACTPERSON&PI10NE �DEPAFiTMENfDIRECTOFt ❑GTYCAUNCIL erryTvedt-266-6087 N �B�� p ��an�� ❑�.� BEDNWUNGIRGENDABY(DASEj �'{� � LI�� ROVi1N6 I ❑ , � 1 �� 1 � r v OflDEq I—! �WET dRECfOR FlN. & MGT. SERVICES D10. C �/{/ � R �w�roa(or+nssisra+n Q Counal Research AliOF9GtUNREPAG6 __ (CLIPALLLOLATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOGATE u DEP E AGCOUNTANT �a�E� � q Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See aitached 1'�st) F1t��� "5 fl M�DattoNS: nppm+a (a) u Rajea �a} PERSONAL SERV�CE CONTRACTS NUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING QUESTIONS: PLANNIN6COMMISSION _pNLSERNCECOMMISSION 1. F135thi5pZl5oR?Rf1eYBfWMk2dUMkfdWnV2C[fOffhiSdBpolhnEM? qe ��� YES NO — — 2 HasMisperso�Jfianeverbeenadtyemplayee? A srn�r _ YES NO dsrnicrcouNGL 3. Does this Perso�Rmi pcssess a sldn not'wtmatty possessed hy a'ry current tlry emp�oyee? — — YES NO �POaTSwt��Gt�p�OaJEC�7v�? Exptain atl yes answers on separate sheet an0 attaeh to green sheet M.ISSUE.OP70RTIlNRY M'MO. WHAT. Vh1EN. WItEFiE. WHV): The problem "detective sidewalk" was caused by multipte problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, treezefthaw cyc{es, senice 1'rfe limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and cortected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to ir�creased pedeshian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: The community wili benefit ftom this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citlzens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF HPPROVED: Historicalty, the sidewaik reconstructions fiave created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue. dSADVANTAGESIFNOTAPPflOVE7 This option would ailow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suits, resuRing in the expenditure of larger dollar arrwunts in repairs and repiacement, as weil as claim payouts. �.���.^�� .�rawa?P.,�,, C„':?;�?�; �F �t � � l.R,E�.y�. a i�va3 TAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S 'J 263 . Z� COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 A, PtA 99 = 630,606 pCINITYNUMBER C932T752-0 84 0000 FlNANGALINFORMAT70N:�XPWNj B� AST � 351 �QOQ C cte 99 = So,00O v CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER �ro�re�sn �iAY 29 1999 COUNCIL FILE NO. _ BY � File o._S99 J 5 - Voting Ward 1 °t9-'-k �'PZ'L! In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: � 599055 - Both sides Edmund Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. S99056 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Charles Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599057 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Thomas Avenue to Como Avenue S99058 - Both sides North Griggs Street £rom Lafond Avenue to Blair Avenue & East side North Griggs Street from Thomas Avenue to Lafond Avenue. 599059 - East side North Hamline Avenue from Sherbuxne Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599060 - Both sides Lafond Avenue from Farrington Street to Elfelt Street. 594061 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from Edmund Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599062 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from La£ond Avenue to Blair Avenue. 599063 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from West Minnehaha Avenue to Seminary Avenue. 599064 - Both sides Thomas Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. qq -�I l3 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Nem construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. Al1 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; 100g of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, � that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. 2 3 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 9t" dav of June, 1999 5:30 o'clock P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas / Nays ✓$enanav ✓Blakey Bostrom.. �a�o Co 1 eman - {�hs �,,,.� Harris � (ahsc,-�� ✓Lantsy ✓�eiter PIIAi i.StiFh MAX 29 1999 y In Favor � Against � AbS�w� Adopted by Council: Date l,`1 � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By C:� /m�L� � % Mayor 'y � t'u�u� t�ilA� �v ury.� � 1�j7`! '� y- lta- `1� � qq-M I� DEPARiMEM/OFFlCN�WNGL ATE INRIA7ED PublicWorksSidewalks -5-99 GREEN SHEET No. � ACTPERSON&PI10NE �DEPAFiTMENfDIRECTOFt ❑GTYCAUNCIL erryTvedt-266-6087 N �B�� p ��an�� ❑�.� BEDNWUNGIRGENDABY(DASEj �'{� � LI�� ROVi1N6 I ❑ , � 1 �� 1 � r v OflDEq I—! �WET dRECfOR FlN. & MGT. SERVICES D10. C �/{/ � R �w�roa(or+nssisra+n Q Counal Research AliOF9GtUNREPAG6 __ (CLIPALLLOLATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOGATE u DEP E AGCOUNTANT �a�E� � q Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See aitached 1'�st) F1t��� "5 fl M�DattoNS: nppm+a (a) u Rajea �a} PERSONAL SERV�CE CONTRACTS NUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING QUESTIONS: PLANNIN6COMMISSION _pNLSERNCECOMMISSION 1. F135thi5pZl5oR?Rf1eYBfWMk2dUMkfdWnV2C[fOffhiSdBpolhnEM? qe ��� YES NO — — 2 HasMisperso�Jfianeverbeenadtyemplayee? A srn�r _ YES NO dsrnicrcouNGL 3. Does this Perso�Rmi pcssess a sldn not'wtmatty possessed hy a'ry current tlry emp�oyee? — — YES NO �POaTSwt��Gt�p�OaJEC�7v�? Exptain atl yes answers on separate sheet an0 attaeh to green sheet M.ISSUE.OP70RTIlNRY M'MO. WHAT. Vh1EN. WItEFiE. WHV): The problem "detective sidewalk" was caused by multipte problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, treezefthaw cyc{es, senice 1'rfe limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and cortected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to ir�creased pedeshian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: The community wili benefit ftom this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citlzens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF HPPROVED: Historicalty, the sidewaik reconstructions fiave created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue. dSADVANTAGESIFNOTAPPflOVE7 This option would ailow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suits, resuRing in the expenditure of larger dollar arrwunts in repairs and repiacement, as weil as claim payouts. �.���.^�� .�rawa?P.,�,, C„':?;�?�; �F �t � � l.R,E�.y�. a i�va3 TAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S 'J 263 . Z� COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 A, PtA 99 = 630,606 pCINITYNUMBER C932T752-0 84 0000 FlNANGALINFORMAT70N:�XPWNj B� AST � 351 �QOQ C cte 99 = So,00O v CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER �ro�re�sn �iAY 29 1999 COUNCIL FILE NO. _ BY � File o._S99 J 5 - Voting Ward 1 °t9-'-k �'PZ'L! In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction at the following locations: � 599055 - Both sides Edmund Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. S99056 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Charles Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599057 - Both sides Elfelt Street from Thomas Avenue to Como Avenue S99058 - Both sides North Griggs Street £rom Lafond Avenue to Blair Avenue & East side North Griggs Street from Thomas Avenue to Lafond Avenue. 599059 - East side North Hamline Avenue from Sherbuxne Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599060 - Both sides Lafond Avenue from Farrington Street to Elfelt Street. 594061 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from Edmund Avenue to Thomas Avenue. 599062 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from La£ond Avenue to Blair Avenue. 599063 - Both sides North Syndicate Street from West Minnehaha Avenue to Seminary Avenue. 599064 - Both sides Thomas Avenue from Arundel Street to North Western Avenue. qq -�I l3 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three Pamily structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Nem construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. Al1 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; 100g of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves: 1. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, � that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and 1998 Public Improvement Aid. 2 3 That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 9t" dav of June, 1999 5:30 o'clock P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul. That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas / Nays ✓$enanav ✓Blakey Bostrom.. �a�o Co 1 eman - {�hs �,,,.� Harris � (ahsc,-�� ✓Lantsy ✓�eiter PIIAi i.StiFh MAX 29 1999 y In Favor � Against � AbS�w� Adopted by Council: Date l,`1 � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By C:� /m�L� � % Mayor 'y � t'u�u� t�ilA� �v ury.� � 1�j7`! '� y- lta- `1� � qq-M I� DEPARiMEM/OFFlCN�WNGL ATE INRIA7ED PublicWorksSidewalks -5-99 GREEN SHEET No. � ACTPERSON&PI10NE �DEPAFiTMENfDIRECTOFt ❑GTYCAUNCIL erryTvedt-266-6087 N �B�� p ��an�� ❑�.� BEDNWUNGIRGENDABY(DASEj �'{� � LI�� ROVi1N6 I ❑ , � 1 �� 1 � r v OflDEq I—! �WET dRECfOR FlN. & MGT. SERVICES D10. C �/{/ � R �w�roa(or+nssisra+n Q Counal Research AliOF9GtUNREPAG6 __ (CLIPALLLOLATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOGATE u DEP E AGCOUNTANT �a�E� � q Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See aitached 1'�st) F1t��� "5 fl M�DattoNS: nppm+a (a) u Rajea �a} PERSONAL SERV�CE CONTRACTS NUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING QUESTIONS: PLANNIN6COMMISSION _pNLSERNCECOMMISSION 1. F135thi5pZl5oR?Rf1eYBfWMk2dUMkfdWnV2C[fOffhiSdBpolhnEM? qe ��� YES NO — — 2 HasMisperso�Jfianeverbeenadtyemplayee? A srn�r _ YES NO dsrnicrcouNGL 3. Does this Perso�Rmi pcssess a sldn not'wtmatty possessed hy a'ry current tlry emp�oyee? — — YES NO �POaTSwt��Gt�p�OaJEC�7v�? Exptain atl yes answers on separate sheet an0 attaeh to green sheet M.ISSUE.OP70RTIlNRY M'MO. WHAT. Vh1EN. WItEFiE. WHV): The problem "detective sidewalk" was caused by multipte problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, treezefthaw cyc{es, senice 1'rfe limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and cortected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to ir�creased pedeshian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED: The community wili benefit ftom this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citlzens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF HPPROVED: Historicalty, the sidewaik reconstructions fiave created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue. dSADVANTAGESIFNOTAPPflOVE7 This option would ailow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personal injury suits, resuRing in the expenditure of larger dollar arrwunts in repairs and repiacement, as weil as claim payouts. �.���.^�� .�rawa?P.,�,, C„':?;�?�; �F �t � � l.R,E�.y�. a i�va3 TAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S 'J 263 . Z� COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 A, PtA 99 = 630,606 pCINITYNUMBER C932T752-0 84 0000 FlNANGALINFORMAT70N:�XPWNj B� AST � 351 �QOQ C cte 99 = So,00O