03-3371 S
CITY OF ST. PAUL
PRELIMINARY ORDER
COUNCIL FILE NO. O3 �,33 �
�
F ile N��2WAL� ��(
Voting Ward_2,5,6
In the Matter of sidewalk reconstruction and/or new construction at the following
locations:
997 Seventh Street West, 667 Cottage Avenue East, 682 Cottage Avenue East,686 Cottage
Avenue East. 791 Cottage Avenue East, 684 Sherwood Avenue, 733Sherwood Avenue, 1563
Dunlap Street North, 1121 Idaho Avenue West, 1127 Idaho Avenue West, 1133 Idaho
Avenue West, 1139 Idaho Avenue West, 1145 Idaho Avenue West, 1149 Idaho Avenue West
1597 Merrill Street, 1374 Ames Avenue, 1402 Ames Avenue, 1406 Ames Avenue, 1410 Ames
Avenue, 1438 Ames Avenue, 1478 Ames Avenue, 1327 Bush Avenue, 1331 Bush Avenue, 813
Hazelwood Avenue, 1342 York Avenue, 1715 York Avenue, 1769 York Avenue.
1
03 -33�
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATBS (One, two or three family structures)
Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$10.49 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $12.59 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 trie actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.69 per square foot.
All corner residential properties will recaive 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 $6.35 per square foot.
The Council o� the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor upon
the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby resolves:
l. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no alternatives, and
that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE for estimated construction rates,
financed by assessments and 2002 Public Improvement Aid.
2.
3
That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 23`� dav of April 2003
5:30 o'clock P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House
Building in the City of Saint Paul.
That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in the manner
provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of hearing, the nature of
the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas Nays
✓Benanav
✓Blakey
✓�ostrom
✓Eoleman
✓Iiarris
✓Lantry
�iter
�In Favor
QAgainst
Adopted by Council: Date '(,, -� � �...003
�� T
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
yor
, PAR��FFI U L � K � ATEINITIATED 1 /
PubiicWorks-SidewalkDivision z-2,-os GREEN S EET NO. 110503
INITIAVDATE I � iNiTwuw,t�
ACT PER:AN 8 PHONE i� pEpqR7b�ENT OIRECTOR ❑ CIN COUNCIL (J� ��
Ilan Czaia (266-6108) 1 nssicr+ cmnrrorsr+er
1� Z c.��3 I � NUMBERFOR i� ❑CRYCLERI(
MU5T BE ON GOUNCII.AGENOA BV (DM1TE) ROtJI1NG gUDGET D�RECTOR ❑ FIN. & MGT. SERVICE$ OIR
5 f.�ry-*��p,�� C j,�� I ���� ��� �� OROER I��roR(ORASSISTANn �j CouncilResearch
�r � fM r i
OTAIiOFSIGNANREPAGES _ (CLJPALLIOCATIONSFORSIGNA7URE) uASSOCIATE ��EPT:ACCOU -
CTIONREQUESTED ��+ � - � � / )
�{�"�� cr' • ' /
V
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 2 �t��(� P- [ �� s L n��
i :. : ` "
RECAMMSNDAT�OtyS: Approve �a.) a Re�ect (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST /1NSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
PIANNMGCAMMISSION _CNIISERVICECAMMISSION 7, HasthispersoNfirtneverworketlunderamnVaGforthisdepartment?
GsCOMM�I7EE YES NO .
— — 2 Has this persoNfirm ever been a tlry employee?
q gT p� YES NO
— ` 3. Ooes this persoNfirtn possess a skill not normaliy posse,ssed by any wrtent city employee?
OISTRICTCAUNCIL _ YES NO
UPPORTS WHICH CWNCII OBJEGi1VE7 Fxp�ain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
u1i�R 5 5 �-
INITIATING PROBLEM, I UE.OPPORTUNITY(WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WH1�:
The problem "de#ective sidewalk" was caused by muftiple probfems, tree rools, poor subgrade materials, free/thaw cycles,
service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and
must be addressed and corrected annuatly. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it
would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falis and possible litigations.
AOVANTAGESIfAPPROVE6
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 pubiic sector jobs as a result.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVE4
Historicaliy, the sidewaik 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. tiaving to assess for walk reconstruction remains a controversiai issue.
DISADVANiAGES IF NOT APPROVEO:
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury
suits, resuiting in the expenditure of larger doliar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as claim payouts.
OTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION E 'I, 612.31 COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCIE ONE) YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE 02-M-0673 A. PIA = 610 ,000 B. AST = 380,000 pCiNIN NUMBER CO2-2T755-0784-00000
FINANCIAI INFORAMTION: (EXPLAIN) . _