Loading...
01-210CITY OF ST. PAIIL PRELIMINARY ORDER COUN IL FIL N0. O�.1.�0 By OG7 Fi N . 50015 Voting Ward 2,4,6 & 7 In tha Matter of sidearalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 500155 - 1010 Tuscarora Avenue, 745 Sims Avenue, 674 Sims Avenue, 670 Sims Avenue, 661 York Avenue, 441 Bates Avenue, 1660 Edmund Avenue. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES i0ne, two or three family 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. Al1 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. 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. MiTLTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.84 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Pau1 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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the ��'' dav of March, 2001 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. 3. 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 �lakey �strom � 1 eman A�'r� Harris �antry ✓1�eiter Adopted by Council: Date��q n� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By .�.��-��.` Q Against S F't�.ff Y�� ����f�/ Mayor P���.tc. I��il�c--; �i���l Worlcs - Sidewalk Division 0 FOR ! OF SIGNANHE PAGES (CLJP ALL LOCATONS FWi SIGNATUF� GREEN� �,�► z �-01 No. 1 ro�4�_ _ iNmnvon� — � CRY COUNCIL � CtiV CL.ERK ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVIGES DIR � Council Research pEppR7MENT DIHECTOR q7y ATTORNEV g�p�E(qRECfOR MAYOR (OR ASSISTPNT) o �� DFP(. Sidewalk in Wards 2&�(See attached list) ' � _ _ ��s ` � IICTCOUNqL _ WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE4 PEHSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING DUESTIONS: CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION 1. HasihispersoNfirtneverworkedunderaconUactforthisdepartmenl? YES NO 2. Has this persoNfirtn ever been a city empioyee? YES NO 3. Does this persorJfirtn Possess a skill �ot normalty possessed by any curteM ciry employee? YES NO Explain ali yes answers on separate sheeTand atlaeh to grean sheet The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrede materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oecur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusabie and subject to. increased pedestriarf injuries from fails and possible litigations. The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. Historicaily, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction proced �s and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half th�e��5�s��ent is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue.� � � � t- � c� �p' �,� )ISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPnoveu: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personai injury suits, resuiting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. SOURCE IANSACTION $ f 5. � 6 ,: COSTBEVENUE BUDGE7ED (ciRC�t onq 99-M � " ?, ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-07� o � (EXPLAIN) c, cts 99 = So,00a NO D1-�-�0 SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECONIlVIENDATION Wazd 2 PROJECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. TUSCARORA AVE. from Pleasant Ave. to S. Chatsworth St. at 1010 Tuscazora Ave. Only. � oo�� INITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. o���� SIJMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMII�NDATION Wazd 6 PRO.IECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK N.S. YORK AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 661 York Ave. Only, S.S. SIMS AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 670 & 674 � (�� Sims Ave. Only & N.S. SIMS AVE. from Walsh St. to Weide St. at 745 Sims Ave. Only. W INITIATINGACTION: This order was initiated by requests from the property owners. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with cracked and uneven panels. C��-3�� SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMNIENDATION Wazd 7 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. NORTH ST. from E. Eighth St. to Bates 5� • __ Ave. at 441 Bates Ave. Only. ��. IIVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. D\ SUNR�IARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMIVIENDATION Ward 4 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. EDMIJND AVE. from Aldine St. to Fry St. ���� at 1660 Edmund Ave. Only. IiVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with tree heaved and scaied panels. ......................................................................................................... CITY OF ST. PAIIL PRELIMINARY ORDER COUN IL FIL N0. O�.1.�0 By OG7 Fi N . 50015 Voting Ward 2,4,6 & 7 In tha Matter of sidearalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 500155 - 1010 Tuscarora Avenue, 745 Sims Avenue, 674 Sims Avenue, 670 Sims Avenue, 661 York Avenue, 441 Bates Avenue, 1660 Edmund Avenue. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES i0ne, two or three family 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. Al1 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. 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. MiTLTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.84 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Pau1 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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the ��'' dav of March, 2001 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. 3. 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 �lakey �strom � 1 eman A�'r� Harris �antry ✓1�eiter Adopted by Council: Date��q n� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By .�.��-��.` Q Against S F't�.ff Y�� ����f�/ Mayor P���.tc. I��il�c--; �i���l Worlcs - Sidewalk Division 0 FOR ! OF SIGNANHE PAGES (CLJP ALL LOCATONS FWi SIGNATUF� GREEN� �,�► z �-01 No. 1 ro�4�_ _ iNmnvon� — � CRY COUNCIL � CtiV CL.ERK ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVIGES DIR � Council Research pEppR7MENT DIHECTOR q7y ATTORNEV g�p�E(qRECfOR MAYOR (OR ASSISTPNT) o �� DFP(. Sidewalk in Wards 2&�(See attached list) ' � _ _ ��s ` � IICTCOUNqL _ WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE4 PEHSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING DUESTIONS: CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION 1. HasihispersoNfirtneverworkedunderaconUactforthisdepartmenl? YES NO 2. Has this persoNfirtn ever been a city empioyee? YES NO 3. Does this persorJfirtn Possess a skill �ot normalty possessed by any curteM ciry employee? YES NO Explain ali yes answers on separate sheeTand atlaeh to grean sheet The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrede materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oecur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusabie and subject to. increased pedestriarf injuries from fails and possible litigations. The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. Historicaily, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction proced �s and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half th�e��5�s��ent is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue.� � � � t- � c� �p' �,� )ISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPnoveu: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personai injury suits, resuiting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. SOURCE IANSACTION $ f 5. � 6 ,: COSTBEVENUE BUDGE7ED (ciRC�t onq 99-M � " ?, ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-07� o � (EXPLAIN) c, cts 99 = So,00a NO D1-�-�0 SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECONIlVIENDATION Wazd 2 PROJECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. TUSCARORA AVE. from Pleasant Ave. to S. Chatsworth St. at 1010 Tuscazora Ave. Only. � oo�� INITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. o���� SIJMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMII�NDATION Wazd 6 PRO.IECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK N.S. YORK AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 661 York Ave. Only, S.S. SIMS AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 670 & 674 � (�� Sims Ave. Only & N.S. SIMS AVE. from Walsh St. to Weide St. at 745 Sims Ave. Only. W INITIATINGACTION: This order was initiated by requests from the property owners. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with cracked and uneven panels. C��-3�� SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMNIENDATION Wazd 7 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. NORTH ST. from E. Eighth St. to Bates 5� • __ Ave. at 441 Bates Ave. Only. ��. IIVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. D\ SUNR�IARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMIVIENDATION Ward 4 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. EDMIJND AVE. from Aldine St. to Fry St. ���� at 1660 Edmund Ave. Only. IiVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with tree heaved and scaied panels. ......................................................................................................... CITY OF ST. PAIIL PRELIMINARY ORDER COUN IL FIL N0. O�.1.�0 By OG7 Fi N . 50015 Voting Ward 2,4,6 & 7 In tha Matter of sidearalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 500155 - 1010 Tuscarora Avenue, 745 Sims Avenue, 674 Sims Avenue, 670 Sims Avenue, 661 York Avenue, 441 Bates Avenue, 1660 Edmund Avenue. *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES i0ne, two or three family 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. Al1 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. 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. MiTLTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.84 per square foot. The Council of the City of Saint Pau1 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. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the ��'' dav of March, 2001 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. 3. 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 �lakey �strom � 1 eman A�'r� Harris �antry ✓1�eiter Adopted by Council: Date��q n� Certified Passed by Council Secretary �In Favor By .�.��-��.` Q Against S F't�.ff Y�� ����f�/ Mayor P���.tc. I��il�c--; �i���l Worlcs - Sidewalk Division 0 FOR ! OF SIGNANHE PAGES (CLJP ALL LOCATONS FWi SIGNATUF� GREEN� �,�► z �-01 No. 1 ro�4�_ _ iNmnvon� — � CRY COUNCIL � CtiV CL.ERK ❑ FlN. & MGT. SERVIGES DIR � Council Research pEppR7MENT DIHECTOR q7y ATTORNEV g�p�E(qRECfOR MAYOR (OR ASSISTPNT) o �� DFP(. Sidewalk in Wards 2&�(See attached list) ' � _ _ ��s ` � IICTCOUNqL _ WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE4 PEHSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING DUESTIONS: CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION 1. HasihispersoNfirtneverworkedunderaconUactforthisdepartmenl? YES NO 2. Has this persoNfirtn ever been a city empioyee? YES NO 3. Does this persorJfirtn Possess a skill �ot normalty possessed by any curteM ciry employee? YES NO Explain ali yes answers on separate sheeTand atlaeh to grean sheet The problem "defective sidewalk" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrede materials, freefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oecur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annually. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusabie and subject to. increased pedestriarf injuries from fails and possible litigations. The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. Historicaily, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction proced �s and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half th�e��5�s��ent is City subsidized. Having to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversial issue.� � � � t- � c� �p' �,� )ISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPnoveu: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in tum, will generate more personai injury suits, resuiting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. SOURCE IANSACTION $ f 5. � 6 ,: COSTBEVENUE BUDGE7ED (ciRC�t onq 99-M � " ?, ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-07� o � (EXPLAIN) c, cts 99 = So,00a NO D1-�-�0 SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECONIlVIENDATION Wazd 2 PROJECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. TUSCARORA AVE. from Pleasant Ave. to S. Chatsworth St. at 1010 Tuscazora Ave. Only. � oo�� INITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. o���� SIJMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMII�NDATION Wazd 6 PRO.IECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK N.S. YORK AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 661 York Ave. Only, S.S. SIMS AVE. from Payne Ave. to Greenbrier St. at 670 & 674 � (�� Sims Ave. Only & N.S. SIMS AVE. from Walsh St. to Weide St. at 745 Sims Ave. Only. W INITIATINGACTION: This order was initiated by requests from the property owners. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with cracked and uneven panels. C��-3�� SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMNIENDATION Wazd 7 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. NORTH ST. from E. Eighth St. to Bates 5� • __ Ave. at 441 Bates Ave. Only. ��. IIVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with settled panels. D\ SUNR�IARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMIVIENDATION Ward 4 PRO.TECT: RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK S.S. EDMIJND AVE. from Aldine St. to Fry St. ���� at 1660 Edmund Ave. Only. IiVITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by a request from the property owner. This walk is poured concrete with tree heaved and scaied panels. .........................................................................................................