Loading...
99-454�� CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER 4RlGlNAL COUNC F LE N0. � 1�ys� PI1R1 ICUCr. �U� �-� 1999 Fi1e No. S 9093 - 599095 Voting Ward_ 2,5,6 o� 4 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: Ward 2 599093 - Both sides South Milton Street from Randolph Avenue to James Avenue. Ward 5 S99094 - Both sides East Idaho Avenue from Wheelock Ridge Road to Edgerton Street. Ward 6 599095 - Both sides Walsh Street from East Hawthorne Avenue to East Orange Avenue. � S� *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) - 58.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six i6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. 23ew construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 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 $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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 14th dav of Julv, 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. 3. That notice of provided by the the improvement COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays j�'Senanav �/Blakey i /�ostrom �Coleman t/Harris ✓Lantry f/lieiter said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of and the total cost thereof as estimated. PIIRItCUrn �d � Adopted by Council: Date � l� JUN 19 1g99 Certified Passed by Council Se etary �In Favor By �, �+-1 � Against � P�� Mayor / E Uri�..iv 1 \II�f4� W�6f-� VUi^l � �� � `�''� r1C-`J����`�y C � •� / DEPARTMEM/OFFICFJCOUNC�� �ATEINrtIATED NO. PublicWo�ksSidewalks -27-99 GREEN SHEET iNmaware COkTAOS PERSON & PHONE O DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ❑ CRY COUNQL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ASSIfiN `� CRY ATlORNEY ��,ry7y �px �' rc � NUMBEHFOq MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BY (DAT� �� pOUTiNG � gUDGE� DIRECTOR ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR OROER ��„�G �� qqq �nenvoq(oaASSiSrar+7) 0 Cpuncii Research OTAL60FSIGNATUFEPAGES _(�LIPALLLOCATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOCIATE u DEP ENTALACCOUNTANT CTION REQUESTEO ' . "7? O� Construct & Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 5 F. 6(See attached list) ' �5 5 RECAMMENDATONS: Appmva (A) or Reject (F� pERSONAL SEBVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS; _PIANNINGCAMMlSS1�N ^ CIVILSFANCECOMMISSION 7. HasNispersoNfitmeverworkedunderac9nt2ctfwthisdepartmenY? __CIBCOMMITTEE YES NO ^ 2. Has ihis persoNfirtn everbeen a ciry employee? �� SrAFF _ YES NO __DISTRICT COUNCIL 3. Does U�is persoNfirm possess a skill not nortnaly possessed by any curtent ciTy smployee? SUPPORTSWHICHCOUNC�LO&IECiIVE? YES NO Esplain all yes answers on separate sheet antl attach to green shset 5 INRIpTING PROBLEM, I ll , pPPOHTUNRY(WHO. WHAT. WHEN, WHERE, WHh: The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeze/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems xcur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible IiGgations. i- ADVqNTAGE5IFAPPROVED: The communiry will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its ciiizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because ot construction proceduses 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 coniroversiai issue. �15ADVANTAGESIF NOT APPROVED: This option wou4d allow the infrastsudure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate ttrore personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. � Cour�i! Re,ear�h C�nter MAY 1 `� 1999 70TALAMOUNTOFTRANSAC710Ng � �. �� COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 t — �, pCINI7YNUMBEp C99-2T752-078400000 FINANCIA� WFORMATION: (IXPIAIN) t ° X C, Ct6 99 = 50,000 �� CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER 4RlGlNAL COUNC F LE N0. � 1�ys� PI1R1 ICUCr. �U� �-� 1999 Fi1e No. S 9093 - 599095 Voting Ward_ 2,5,6 o� 4 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: Ward 2 599093 - Both sides South Milton Street from Randolph Avenue to James Avenue. Ward 5 S99094 - Both sides East Idaho Avenue from Wheelock Ridge Road to Edgerton Street. Ward 6 599095 - Both sides Walsh Street from East Hawthorne Avenue to East Orange Avenue. � S� *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) - 58.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six i6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. 23ew construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 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 $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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 14th dav of Julv, 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. 3. That notice of provided by the the improvement COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays j�'Senanav �/Blakey i /�ostrom �Coleman t/Harris ✓Lantry f/lieiter said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of and the total cost thereof as estimated. PIIRItCUrn �d � Adopted by Council: Date � l� JUN 19 1g99 Certified Passed by Council Se etary �In Favor By �, �+-1 � Against � P�� Mayor / E Uri�..iv 1 \II�f4� W�6f-� VUi^l � �� � `�''� r1C-`J����`�y C � •� / DEPARTMEM/OFFICFJCOUNC�� �ATEINrtIATED NO. PublicWo�ksSidewalks -27-99 GREEN SHEET iNmaware COkTAOS PERSON & PHONE O DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ❑ CRY COUNQL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ASSIfiN `� CRY ATlORNEY ��,ry7y �px �' rc � NUMBEHFOq MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BY (DAT� �� pOUTiNG � gUDGE� DIRECTOR ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR OROER ��„�G �� qqq �nenvoq(oaASSiSrar+7) 0 Cpuncii Research OTAL60FSIGNATUFEPAGES _(�LIPALLLOCATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOCIATE u DEP ENTALACCOUNTANT CTION REQUESTEO ' . "7? O� Construct & Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 5 F. 6(See attached list) ' �5 5 RECAMMENDATONS: Appmva (A) or Reject (F� pERSONAL SEBVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS; _PIANNINGCAMMlSS1�N ^ CIVILSFANCECOMMISSION 7. HasNispersoNfitmeverworkedunderac9nt2ctfwthisdepartmenY? __CIBCOMMITTEE YES NO ^ 2. Has ihis persoNfirtn everbeen a ciry employee? �� SrAFF _ YES NO __DISTRICT COUNCIL 3. Does U�is persoNfirm possess a skill not nortnaly possessed by any curtent ciTy smployee? SUPPORTSWHICHCOUNC�LO&IECiIVE? YES NO Esplain all yes answers on separate sheet antl attach to green shset 5 INRIpTING PROBLEM, I ll , pPPOHTUNRY(WHO. WHAT. WHEN, WHERE, WHh: The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeze/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems xcur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible IiGgations. i- ADVqNTAGE5IFAPPROVED: The communiry will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its ciiizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because ot construction proceduses 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 coniroversiai issue. �15ADVANTAGESIF NOT APPROVED: This option wou4d allow the infrastsudure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate ttrore personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. � Cour�i! Re,ear�h C�nter MAY 1 `� 1999 70TALAMOUNTOFTRANSAC710Ng � �. �� COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 t — �, pCINI7YNUMBEp C99-2T752-078400000 FINANCIA� WFORMATION: (IXPIAIN) t ° X C, Ct6 99 = 50,000 �� CITY OF ST. PAUL PRELIMINARY ORDER 4RlGlNAL COUNC F LE N0. � 1�ys� PI1R1 ICUCr. �U� �-� 1999 Fi1e No. S 9093 - 599095 Voting Ward_ 2,5,6 o� 4 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: Ward 2 599093 - Both sides South Milton Street from Randolph Avenue to James Avenue. Ward 5 S99094 - Both sides East Idaho Avenue from Wheelock Ridge Road to Edgerton Street. Ward 6 599095 - Both sides Walsh Street from East Hawthorne Avenue to East Orange Avenue. � S� *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) - 58.65 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $10.38 per front foot for a six i6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. 23ew construction (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 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 $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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 14th dav of Julv, 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. 3. That notice of provided by the the improvement COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays j�'Senanav �/Blakey i /�ostrom �Coleman t/Harris ✓Lantry f/lieiter said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of and the total cost thereof as estimated. PIIRItCUrn �d � Adopted by Council: Date � l� JUN 19 1g99 Certified Passed by Council Se etary �In Favor By �, �+-1 � Against � P�� Mayor / E Uri�..iv 1 \II�f4� W�6f-� VUi^l � �� � `�''� r1C-`J����`�y C � •� / DEPARTMEM/OFFICFJCOUNC�� �ATEINrtIATED NO. PublicWo�ksSidewalks -27-99 GREEN SHEET iNmaware COkTAOS PERSON & PHONE O DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ❑ CRY COUNQL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ASSIfiN `� CRY ATlORNEY ��,ry7y �px �' rc � NUMBEHFOq MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BY (DAT� �� pOUTiNG � gUDGE� DIRECTOR ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR OROER ��„�G �� qqq �nenvoq(oaASSiSrar+7) 0 Cpuncii Research OTAL60FSIGNATUFEPAGES _(�LIPALLLOCATIONSFORSIGNANR� u ASSOCIATE u DEP ENTALACCOUNTANT CTION REQUESTEO ' . "7? O� Construct & Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 5 F. 6(See attached list) ' �5 5 RECAMMENDATONS: Appmva (A) or Reject (F� pERSONAL SEBVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS; _PIANNINGCAMMlSS1�N ^ CIVILSFANCECOMMISSION 7. HasNispersoNfitmeverworkedunderac9nt2ctfwthisdepartmenY? __CIBCOMMITTEE YES NO ^ 2. Has ihis persoNfirtn everbeen a ciry employee? �� SrAFF _ YES NO __DISTRICT COUNCIL 3. Does U�is persoNfirm possess a skill not nortnaly possessed by any curtent ciTy smployee? SUPPORTSWHICHCOUNC�LO&IECiIVE? YES NO Esplain all yes answers on separate sheet antl attach to green shset 5 INRIpTING PROBLEM, I ll , pPPOHTUNRY(WHO. WHAT. WHEN, WHERE, WHh: The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeze/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems xcur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible IiGgations. i- ADVqNTAGE5IFAPPROVED: The communiry will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its ciiizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because ot construction proceduses 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 coniroversiai issue. �15ADVANTAGESIF NOT APPROVED: This option wou4d allow the infrastsudure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate ttrore personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as ciaim payouts. � Cour�i! Re,ear�h C�nter MAY 1 `� 1999 70TALAMOUNTOFTRANSAC710Ng � �. �� COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-o669 t — �, pCINI7YNUMBEp C99-2T752-078400000 FINANCIA� WFORMATION: (IXPIAIN) t ° X C, Ct6 99 = 50,000