Loading...
01-590CITY OF ST. PAUL • �. , COUNCIL F N0. — S O By Fil o_501089,50 127,501128,S01131, S01134,501149-501152 Voting Ward2,3,4 & 7 In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 501089 - Both sides Concord Street from Ada Street to Highway 52. 501127 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from Pedersen Street to North Winthrop Street. 501128 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from North Ruth Street to Pedersen Street. 501131 - Both sides Upper Afton Road from Darlene Street to North Ruth Street & North Side Upper Afton Road from North White Bear Avenue to Darlene Street at 1925 Upper A£ton Road Only. 501134 - Both sicles North White Bear Avenue from Upper Afton Road to Suburban Avenue. 501149 - Both sides Eleanor Avenue from South 5nelling Avenue to South Pascal Street 501150 - Both sides Niles Avenue from South Syndicate Street to South Griggs Street. 501151 - Both sides Portland Avenue from North Snelling Avenue to North Saratoga Street. 501152 - Both sides East Fourth Street from Bates Avenue to Maple Street. a \- Sq,o *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTIOI3 RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$10.06 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $12.07 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 0£ the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 per square foot. Al1 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $6.09 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 27 dav of June , 2��1 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 �B� nanav ,/�lakey ,/�ostrom vC�o 1 eman ihTarr i s �antry � iter Adopted by Council: Date� a-ao� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � s � , 1 d Against / Mayor �/��j ��,,��� i�u�u�� u�l �- r�l U��� DEPARTMENPOFFICE/W UNCIL PuBiic Worics - Sidewaik Division COMACT PEqSON 8 PHONE Jerry Tvedt (266-6087) MUSTBEONCqUNqLAGENDABY(DATEy{�{IIG 'L %� IN� I�FCI ^ IT OTALtOFSIGNATUREPAGES _ �CLIPALLI CTION FE�UESTED Recon$3ruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 3,4 & 7 �vv� o�-� f�-iU���U �� OATEINfTIA7ED Hp_ 110436 � s-,s-o, GREEN SHEET INRIAVDATE INIiIAVpA"fE �DEPAARAENtDIRECTOR ❑CITYCOUNGL � ASSIGN '�CRYATfORNEY ❑CITYCfERK � NUMBEpFOR PaiiTING �BUDGETDIREGTOR ❑FIN.&MGT.SEFVICESDIR. OHOEFi ` �MAYOR(OflASSISTA1Jn 01 CouncilResearch FDA SiGNATURE� 27 y� � � - � Z =(A)orRel fR) PERSONAL EFIVICECO CTSMUSTANSWERTNEFOLLOWINGQUESTIONS: N CIVILSERVICECAMMISSION 7. Hasihisperso�rtnevervrorkedunderacontrac[torthisdepartrne�t? YES NO — 2. Ha5 ihis persoNfirm ever been a city employee? YES NO ! 3. Does ihi5 person/firm possess a skill not nortnaity possessed by any curtent ciry employee? _ YES NO oadECrivE? 6cpiain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet The problem "deieclive sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems,lree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeRhaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur 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 unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. IF APPROVED: The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Properry owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess ior wa{k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. This option would allow the infrastrticture of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wili generate more'personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. IOUNT OF TRANSAC7ION $ 73 � � SOURGE Ot_M'O67z A. P!A ° INFORMATION'(E%PLAIN) B. AST s Caur�i! Research Center .�s.�; � 3� � 2QQ1 COST/REVENUE HUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES No �rmnr�n���o�o COl-2T754-0784-00000 � CITY OF ST. PAUL • �. , COUNCIL F N0. — S O By Fil o_501089,50 127,501128,S01131, S01134,501149-501152 Voting Ward2,3,4 & 7 In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 501089 - Both sides Concord Street from Ada Street to Highway 52. 501127 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from Pedersen Street to North Winthrop Street. 501128 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from North Ruth Street to Pedersen Street. 501131 - Both sides Upper Afton Road from Darlene Street to North Ruth Street & North Side Upper Afton Road from North White Bear Avenue to Darlene Street at 1925 Upper A£ton Road Only. 501134 - Both sicles North White Bear Avenue from Upper Afton Road to Suburban Avenue. 501149 - Both sides Eleanor Avenue from South 5nelling Avenue to South Pascal Street 501150 - Both sides Niles Avenue from South Syndicate Street to South Griggs Street. 501151 - Both sides Portland Avenue from North Snelling Avenue to North Saratoga Street. 501152 - Both sides East Fourth Street from Bates Avenue to Maple Street. a \- Sq,o *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTIOI3 RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$10.06 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $12.07 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 0£ the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 per square foot. Al1 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $6.09 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 27 dav of June , 2��1 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 �B� nanav ,/�lakey ,/�ostrom vC�o 1 eman ihTarr i s �antry � iter Adopted by Council: Date� a-ao� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � s � , 1 d Against / Mayor �/��j ��,,��� i�u�u�� u�l �- r�l U��� DEPARTMENPOFFICE/W UNCIL PuBiic Worics - Sidewaik Division COMACT PEqSON 8 PHONE Jerry Tvedt (266-6087) MUSTBEONCqUNqLAGENDABY(DATEy{�{IIG 'L %� IN� I�FCI ^ IT OTALtOFSIGNATUREPAGES _ �CLIPALLI CTION FE�UESTED Recon$3ruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 3,4 & 7 �vv� o�-� f�-iU���U �� OATEINfTIA7ED Hp_ 110436 � s-,s-o, GREEN SHEET INRIAVDATE INIiIAVpA"fE �DEPAARAENtDIRECTOR ❑CITYCOUNGL � ASSIGN '�CRYATfORNEY ❑CITYCfERK � NUMBEpFOR PaiiTING �BUDGETDIREGTOR ❑FIN.&MGT.SEFVICESDIR. OHOEFi ` �MAYOR(OflASSISTA1Jn 01 CouncilResearch FDA SiGNATURE� 27 y� � � - � Z =(A)orRel fR) PERSONAL EFIVICECO CTSMUSTANSWERTNEFOLLOWINGQUESTIONS: N CIVILSERVICECAMMISSION 7. Hasihisperso�rtnevervrorkedunderacontrac[torthisdepartrne�t? YES NO — 2. Ha5 ihis persoNfirm ever been a city employee? YES NO ! 3. Does ihi5 person/firm possess a skill not nortnaity possessed by any curtent ciry employee? _ YES NO oadECrivE? 6cpiain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet The problem "deieclive sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems,lree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeRhaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur 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 unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. IF APPROVED: The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Properry owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess ior wa{k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. This option would allow the infrastrticture of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wili generate more'personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. IOUNT OF TRANSAC7ION $ 73 � � SOURGE Ot_M'O67z A. P!A ° INFORMATION'(E%PLAIN) B. AST s Caur�i! Research Center .�s.�; � 3� � 2QQ1 COST/REVENUE HUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES No �rmnr�n���o�o COl-2T754-0784-00000 � CITY OF ST. PAUL • �. , COUNCIL F N0. — S O By Fil o_501089,50 127,501128,S01131, S01134,501149-501152 Voting Ward2,3,4 & 7 In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following locations: 501089 - Both sides Concord Street from Ada Street to Highway 52. 501127 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from Pedersen Street to North Winthrop Street. 501128 - Both sides Suburban Avenue from North Ruth Street to Pedersen Street. 501131 - Both sides Upper Afton Road from Darlene Street to North Ruth Street & North Side Upper Afton Road from North White Bear Avenue to Darlene Street at 1925 Upper A£ton Road Only. 501134 - Both sicles North White Bear Avenue from Upper Afton Road to Suburban Avenue. 501149 - Both sides Eleanor Avenue from South 5nelling Avenue to South Pascal Street 501150 - Both sides Niles Avenue from South Syndicate Street to South Griggs Street. 501151 - Both sides Portland Avenue from North Snelling Avenue to North Saratoga Street. 501152 - Both sides East Fourth Street from Bates Avenue to Maple Street. a \- Sq,o *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTIOI3 RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$10.06 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $12.07 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 1000 0£ the actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 per square foot. Al1 corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL(More than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100$ of actual cost estimated to be approximately $6.09 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 27 dav of June , 2��1 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 �B� nanav ,/�lakey ,/�ostrom vC�o 1 eman ihTarr i s �antry � iter Adopted by Council: Date� a-ao� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By � s � , 1 d Against / Mayor �/��j ��,,��� i�u�u�� u�l �- r�l U��� DEPARTMENPOFFICE/W UNCIL PuBiic Worics - Sidewaik Division COMACT PEqSON 8 PHONE Jerry Tvedt (266-6087) MUSTBEONCqUNqLAGENDABY(DATEy{�{IIG 'L %� IN� I�FCI ^ IT OTALtOFSIGNATUREPAGES _ �CLIPALLI CTION FE�UESTED Recon$3ruct Sidewalk in Wards 2, 3,4 & 7 �vv� o�-� f�-iU���U �� OATEINfTIA7ED Hp_ 110436 � s-,s-o, GREEN SHEET INRIAVDATE INIiIAVpA"fE �DEPAARAENtDIRECTOR ❑CITYCOUNGL � ASSIGN '�CRYATfORNEY ❑CITYCfERK � NUMBEpFOR PaiiTING �BUDGETDIREGTOR ❑FIN.&MGT.SEFVICESDIR. OHOEFi ` �MAYOR(OflASSISTA1Jn 01 CouncilResearch FDA SiGNATURE� 27 y� � � - � Z =(A)orRel fR) PERSONAL EFIVICECO CTSMUSTANSWERTNEFOLLOWINGQUESTIONS: N CIVILSERVICECAMMISSION 7. Hasihisperso�rtnevervrorkedunderacontrac[torthisdepartrne�t? YES NO — 2. Ha5 ihis persoNfirm ever been a city employee? YES NO ! 3. Does ihi5 person/firm possess a skill not nortnaity possessed by any curtent ciry employee? _ YES NO oadECrivE? 6cpiain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet The problem "deieclive sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems,lree roots, poor subgrade materials, freeRhaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur 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 unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. IF APPROVED: The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating public sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstruction has created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Properry owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess ior wa{k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. This option would allow the infrastrticture of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wili generate more'personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as well as claim payouts. IOUNT OF TRANSAC7ION $ 73 � � SOURGE Ot_M'O67z A. P!A ° INFORMATION'(E%PLAIN) B. AST s Caur�i! Research Center .�s.�; � 3� � 2QQ1 COST/REVENUE HUDGETED (CIRCLE ON� YES No �rmnr�n���o�o COl-2T754-0784-00000 �