00-425CITY OF 3T. PAUI,
PREI,IMINARY ORDER
File�l�7o.L/500093 - SQ0095
0 R 1 G 1 N A L Vot�ng Ward_ 4& 5
�
In the Matter ot sidewalk recoastructioa andfor new construction at the followiag
locations:
500093 - Both sides Dewe1V Street from Laurel Avenue to Selby Avenue.
r
500094 - I3orth side Laurel Avenue from North Howell 5treet to Dewey Street.
500095 - North side West Jessamine Avenue from Galtier Street to Marion Street.
OR1G{NAL
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
a0 -y �S
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Recoastruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$9.65 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $11.58 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction
(where no walk existed) - 100$ of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.32 per square foot.
A11 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long sic3e" of
the property.
MIILTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $5.84 per square foot.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon
the above improvement, and having aonsidered 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 2000 Public Improvement Aid.
2
3
That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24` dav of Mav, 2000
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 thereo£ as estimated.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas � Nays
f/Benanav
✓lakey
�ostrom
� 1 eman
�arri s
�antry
�eiter
Adopted by Council: Date 3 ��JO a
.
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
� In Favor By ��� �a . ���--�c�..�____,-� _
� Against C,� �\�121�/���
� Mayor
7//
Works - Sidewalk Division
lOFSIGNAiUqEPAGES _
in Wards 4� 5(See attached list)
CIVIL SEFVICE COMMISSION
OBJECTIVE�
�`�
GREEN
�� �� J DIREGTOR
FOR IJ� mAnORN E Y
� BUDGET DIAECTOR
� n MAYOA (OR ASSISiAN�
��L i �f/Zl (�
NO,
wmnwA�
❑ cm couNCa
❑ CITY CLERK
❑ FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR.
� Council Research
I I DEPT. CAU �F t9
�o_ya�
PERSONAL SEAVICE COMRACTS MUSTANSWEATHE FOLLOWMG �UESTIONS;
1. Has this persoNfirtn ever wodced under a contrect for this departmenC?
YES NO
2. Has this personlfirtn ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
3. Ooes this persoNfirm possess a skill not nommtlly possessetl by any curtent City emptoyee?
YES NO
Erzplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to gteen sheM
� '1`�5 1
PROBIEM, ISSUE, OPPOR7UNRY (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WH1'�:
The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freelthaw cycles,
service life limits, chemical addftives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probtems occur 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 unusabie and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
IF APPROVED:
The community will benefit from this project because it wi�l provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result.
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because ot 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.
APPR�VEO:
This option would aflow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wiil generate more personat injury
suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as ciaim payouts.
Cauusicci! R�search C�nter
APR 2 4 2�D0
AMOUNT OFTRANSACTION $ / r��7 � 7o CQST/REVENUE BUDGETE� (CIRCLE ONE) YES No
dG50URCE 00-M-0671 A P�.Q �0 = � ACINI7YNUMBER C'� 0-'2�']rJ$-0784-�00�0
nLINFOFMATION:(IXPIAM} � ° � '
C. CIB 00 = 50;000 •-
CITY OF 3T. PAUI,
PREI,IMINARY ORDER
File�l�7o.L/500093 - SQ0095
0 R 1 G 1 N A L Vot�ng Ward_ 4& 5
�
In the Matter ot sidewalk recoastructioa andfor new construction at the followiag
locations:
500093 - Both sides Dewe1V Street from Laurel Avenue to Selby Avenue.
r
500094 - I3orth side Laurel Avenue from North Howell 5treet to Dewey Street.
500095 - North side West Jessamine Avenue from Galtier Street to Marion Street.
OR1G{NAL
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
a0 -y �S
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Recoastruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$9.65 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $11.58 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction
(where no walk existed) - 100$ of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.32 per square foot.
A11 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long sic3e" of
the property.
MIILTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $5.84 per square foot.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon
the above improvement, and having aonsidered 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 2000 Public Improvement Aid.
2
3
That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24` dav of Mav, 2000
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 thereo£ as estimated.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas � Nays
f/Benanav
✓lakey
�ostrom
� 1 eman
�arri s
�antry
�eiter
Adopted by Council: Date 3 ��JO a
.
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
� In Favor By ��� �a . ���--�c�..�____,-� _
� Against C,� �\�121�/���
� Mayor
7//
Works - Sidewalk Division
lOFSIGNAiUqEPAGES _
in Wards 4� 5(See attached list)
CIVIL SEFVICE COMMISSION
OBJECTIVE�
�`�
GREEN
�� �� J DIREGTOR
FOR IJ� mAnORN E Y
� BUDGET DIAECTOR
� n MAYOA (OR ASSISiAN�
��L i �f/Zl (�
NO,
wmnwA�
❑ cm couNCa
❑ CITY CLERK
❑ FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR.
� Council Research
I I DEPT. CAU �F t9
�o_ya�
PERSONAL SEAVICE COMRACTS MUSTANSWEATHE FOLLOWMG �UESTIONS;
1. Has this persoNfirtn ever wodced under a contrect for this departmenC?
YES NO
2. Has this personlfirtn ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
3. Ooes this persoNfirm possess a skill not nommtlly possessetl by any curtent City emptoyee?
YES NO
Erzplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to gteen sheM
� '1`�5 1
PROBIEM, ISSUE, OPPOR7UNRY (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WH1'�:
The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freelthaw cycles,
service life limits, chemical addftives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probtems occur 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 unusabie and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
IF APPROVED:
The community will benefit from this project because it wi�l provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result.
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because ot 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.
APPR�VEO:
This option would aflow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wiil generate more personat injury
suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as ciaim payouts.
Cauusicci! R�search C�nter
APR 2 4 2�D0
AMOUNT OFTRANSACTION $ / r��7 � 7o CQST/REVENUE BUDGETE� (CIRCLE ONE) YES No
dG50URCE 00-M-0671 A P�.Q �0 = � ACINI7YNUMBER C'� 0-'2�']rJ$-0784-�00�0
nLINFOFMATION:(IXPIAM} � ° � '
C. CIB 00 = 50;000 •-
CITY OF 3T. PAUI,
PREI,IMINARY ORDER
File�l�7o.L/500093 - SQ0095
0 R 1 G 1 N A L Vot�ng Ward_ 4& 5
�
In the Matter ot sidewalk recoastructioa andfor new construction at the followiag
locations:
500093 - Both sides Dewe1V Street from Laurel Avenue to Selby Avenue.
r
500094 - I3orth side Laurel Avenue from North Howell 5treet to Dewey Street.
500095 - North side West Jessamine Avenue from Galtier Street to Marion Street.
OR1G{NAL
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
a0 -y �S
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Recoastruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$9.65 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $11.58 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction
(where no walk existed) - 100$ of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.32 per square foot.
A11 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long sic3e" of
the property.
MIILTI-RESIDENTIAL(MOre than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $5.84 per square foot.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon
the above improvement, and having aonsidered 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 2000 Public Improvement Aid.
2
3
That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 24` dav of Mav, 2000
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 thereo£ as estimated.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas � Nays
f/Benanav
✓lakey
�ostrom
� 1 eman
�arri s
�antry
�eiter
Adopted by Council: Date 3 ��JO a
.
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
� In Favor By ��� �a . ���--�c�..�____,-� _
� Against C,� �\�121�/���
� Mayor
7//
Works - Sidewalk Division
lOFSIGNAiUqEPAGES _
in Wards 4� 5(See attached list)
CIVIL SEFVICE COMMISSION
OBJECTIVE�
�`�
GREEN
�� �� J DIREGTOR
FOR IJ� mAnORN E Y
� BUDGET DIAECTOR
� n MAYOA (OR ASSISiAN�
��L i �f/Zl (�
NO,
wmnwA�
❑ cm couNCa
❑ CITY CLERK
❑ FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR.
� Council Research
I I DEPT. CAU �F t9
�o_ya�
PERSONAL SEAVICE COMRACTS MUSTANSWEATHE FOLLOWMG �UESTIONS;
1. Has this persoNfirtn ever wodced under a contrect for this departmenC?
YES NO
2. Has this personlfirtn ever been a ciry employee?
YES NO
3. Ooes this persoNfirm possess a skill not nommtlly possessetl by any curtent City emptoyee?
YES NO
Erzplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to gteen sheM
� '1`�5 1
PROBIEM, ISSUE, OPPOR7UNRY (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WH1'�:
The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freelthaw cycles,
service life limits, chemical addftives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probtems occur 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 unusabie and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
IF APPROVED:
The community will benefit from this project because it wi�l provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result.
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because ot 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.
APPR�VEO:
This option would aflow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wiil generate more personat injury
suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as ciaim payouts.
Cauusicci! R�search C�nter
APR 2 4 2�D0
AMOUNT OFTRANSACTION $ / r��7 � 7o CQST/REVENUE BUDGETE� (CIRCLE ONE) YES No
dG50URCE 00-M-0671 A P�.Q �0 = � ACINI7YNUMBER C'� 0-'2�']rJ$-0784-�00�0
nLINFOFMATION:(IXPIAM} � ° � '
C. CIB 00 = 50;000 •-