Loading...
00-427CITSC OF ST. PAt7L ORDER ORlG{NAL COUNCIL FILE N0. O� � ya? � �_ By �n File � � 57 - 500066 Voting Ward� 6 & 7 Iu the Matter of sidewalk raconstructioa aad/or new sideovalk constxuction at the following locations: 5�0057 - Both sides Beech Street from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500058 - North side Beech Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500059 - Both sides Cypress Street from Margaret Street to East Minnehaha Avenue. 500060 - North side East Seventh Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500061 - North side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Cypress Street & South side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Russell Street. 500062 - Both sides Case Avenue from Mendota Street to Forest Street. 500063 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Arcade Street to Mendota Street. 500064 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Walsh Street to Weide 5treet. 500065 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500066 - West sides Russell Street from Sims Avenue to Case Avenue. ao - �i�'? OR�G4�AL *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstructioa (replacement of old sidewalk) - S9•65 per front foot for a £ive i5) fooC wide walk and $11.55 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New constructian (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.32 per square foot. All corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the first 15� feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting tYte "long side" of the property. Mi3LTI-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 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 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 thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓Benanav ✓131akey ,�ostrom ,�'oleman �rris �antry �iter Adopted by Council: Date 3 a v�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � � Against r2 6L �/ y {� Mayor ! ! - Sidewalk Division � GREEN K�.i `t/Z��(10 _T rao. yo27as BY (DATE) FOP DEPARTMEM DIFECTOR CITYATTORNEY HUDSEf DIRECTOR MAVOR (OR ASSISTANI] /SSOCIATE ❑CfiYCAUNC�L ❑ CITY CLERK ❑ FlN. & MGL SERVICES DI0. Q Council Research �rJ S JL�a ` � Reconstruct Existing Sidewalk & Conslrucl New Sidewalk in Wards 6& 7(See attached list) 11.� �5 S - ECqMMENOATIONS: ApProve {A) a� Rejea (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTF?ACiS MUS7 ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESiIONS: _PIANNINGCOMMISSION _CMI,SERVICECOMMISSION �, HasthispersoNfirtneverworkedunderacontractforthisdepartrnent? QBCOMMfITEE YES NO — 2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city empfoyee? gS7AfF _ YES NO OBJEGT7VE? OPPORTUNfTY (WHO, WHAT, NMEN, 3. Does this perso�rtn possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? YES NO F�eplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet The pro6lem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probiems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuapy. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it wouid be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. IF APPROVE6 The community will benefit from this project because it wiii provide safe defect free sidewaiks for its citizens. Tfie sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. IF APPROVED� Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has 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. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as wei{ as claim payouts. fi4�a�! R£s�aT�il C�¢148f �;i'P 2 �. 20fl0 BUOGETEO(qRCLEONE) NO FUNDING SOURCE OO^�M"O67 � A� P I A OO = GZO � OO� qC1TVi7Y NUMBER FINANqAL MFORMATION: (EXPIAIN) B � � � C, CIB Op = 50,004 CITSC OF ST. PAt7L ORDER ORlG{NAL COUNCIL FILE N0. O� � ya? � �_ By �n File � � 57 - 500066 Voting Ward� 6 & 7 Iu the Matter of sidewalk raconstructioa aad/or new sideovalk constxuction at the following locations: 5�0057 - Both sides Beech Street from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500058 - North side Beech Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500059 - Both sides Cypress Street from Margaret Street to East Minnehaha Avenue. 500060 - North side East Seventh Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500061 - North side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Cypress Street & South side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Russell Street. 500062 - Both sides Case Avenue from Mendota Street to Forest Street. 500063 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Arcade Street to Mendota Street. 500064 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Walsh Street to Weide 5treet. 500065 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500066 - West sides Russell Street from Sims Avenue to Case Avenue. ao - �i�'? OR�G4�AL *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstructioa (replacement of old sidewalk) - S9•65 per front foot for a £ive i5) fooC wide walk and $11.55 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New constructian (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.32 per square foot. All corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the first 15� feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting tYte "long side" of the property. Mi3LTI-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 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 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 thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓Benanav ✓131akey ,�ostrom ,�'oleman �rris �antry �iter Adopted by Council: Date 3 a v�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � � Against r2 6L �/ y {� Mayor ! ! - Sidewalk Division � GREEN K�.i `t/Z��(10 _T rao. yo27as BY (DATE) FOP DEPARTMEM DIFECTOR CITYATTORNEY HUDSEf DIRECTOR MAVOR (OR ASSISTANI] /SSOCIATE ❑CfiYCAUNC�L ❑ CITY CLERK ❑ FlN. & MGL SERVICES DI0. Q Council Research �rJ S JL�a ` � Reconstruct Existing Sidewalk & Conslrucl New Sidewalk in Wards 6& 7(See attached list) 11.� �5 S - ECqMMENOATIONS: ApProve {A) a� Rejea (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTF?ACiS MUS7 ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESiIONS: _PIANNINGCOMMISSION _CMI,SERVICECOMMISSION �, HasthispersoNfirtneverworkedunderacontractforthisdepartrnent? QBCOMMfITEE YES NO — 2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city empfoyee? gS7AfF _ YES NO OBJEGT7VE? OPPORTUNfTY (WHO, WHAT, NMEN, 3. Does this perso�rtn possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? YES NO F�eplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet The pro6lem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probiems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuapy. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it wouid be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. IF APPROVE6 The community will benefit from this project because it wiii provide safe defect free sidewaiks for its citizens. Tfie sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. IF APPROVED� Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has 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. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as wei{ as claim payouts. fi4�a�! R£s�aT�il C�¢148f �;i'P 2 �. 20fl0 BUOGETEO(qRCLEONE) NO FUNDING SOURCE OO^�M"O67 � A� P I A OO = GZO � OO� qC1TVi7Y NUMBER FINANqAL MFORMATION: (EXPIAIN) B � � � C, CIB Op = 50,004 CITSC OF ST. PAt7L ORDER ORlG{NAL COUNCIL FILE N0. O� � ya? � �_ By �n File � � 57 - 500066 Voting Ward� 6 & 7 Iu the Matter of sidewalk raconstructioa aad/or new sideovalk constxuction at the following locations: 5�0057 - Both sides Beech Street from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500058 - North side Beech Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500059 - Both sides Cypress Street from Margaret Street to East Minnehaha Avenue. 500060 - North side East Seventh Street from Johnson Parkway to Clarence Street. 500061 - North side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Cypress Street & South side Case Avenue from Forest Street to Russell Street. 500062 - Both sides Case Avenue from Mendota Street to Forest Street. 500063 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Arcade Street to Mendota Street. 500064 - Both sides East Cook Avenue from Walsh Street to Weide 5treet. 500065 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Cypress Street to Earl Street. 500066 - West sides Russell Street from Sims Avenue to Case Avenue. ao - �i�'? OR�G4�AL *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstructioa (replacement of old sidewalk) - S9•65 per front foot for a £ive i5) fooC wide walk and $11.55 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New constructian (where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.32 per square foot. All corner residential properties wi11 receive a credit up to the first 15� feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting tYte "long side" of the property. Mi3LTI-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 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 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 thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓Benanav ✓131akey ,�ostrom ,�'oleman �rris �antry �iter Adopted by Council: Date 3 a v�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � � Against r2 6L �/ y {� Mayor ! ! - Sidewalk Division � GREEN K�.i `t/Z��(10 _T rao. yo27as BY (DATE) FOP DEPARTMEM DIFECTOR CITYATTORNEY HUDSEf DIRECTOR MAVOR (OR ASSISTANI] /SSOCIATE ❑CfiYCAUNC�L ❑ CITY CLERK ❑ FlN. & MGL SERVICES DI0. Q Council Research �rJ S JL�a ` � Reconstruct Existing Sidewalk & Conslrucl New Sidewalk in Wards 6& 7(See attached list) 11.� �5 S - ECqMMENOATIONS: ApProve {A) a� Rejea (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTF?ACiS MUS7 ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESiIONS: _PIANNINGCOMMISSION _CMI,SERVICECOMMISSION �, HasthispersoNfirtneverworkedunderacontractforthisdepartrnent? QBCOMMfITEE YES NO — 2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city empfoyee? gS7AfF _ YES NO OBJEGT7VE? OPPORTUNfTY (WHO, WHAT, NMEN, 3. Does this perso�rtn possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? YES NO F�eplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet The pro6lem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These probiems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuapy. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it wouid be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations. IF APPROVE6 The community will benefit from this project because it wiii provide safe defect free sidewaiks for its citizens. Tfie sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. IF APPROVED� Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has 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. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as wei{ as claim payouts. fi4�a�! R£s�aT�il C�¢148f �;i'P 2 �. 20fl0 BUOGETEO(qRCLEONE) NO FUNDING SOURCE OO^�M"O67 � A� P I A OO = GZO � OO� qC1TVi7Y NUMBER FINANqAL MFORMATION: (EXPIAIN) B � � � C, CIB Op = 50,004