94-1036 F • .ter
ORIGINAL 4
, /44'
CITY OF ST. PAUL GOUNC L FILL NO. g ' / 3 '
FINAL ORDER By _
File No. A75
Voting Ward 2
In the Hatter of Sidewalk reconstruction at the following location(s):
on both sides West George Street from Ohio Street to Orleans St. and
west side Ohio Street from West George Street to approx. 45 feet south
of West George\ Street.
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or t ree family structures)
Reconstruction (replacement of o d sidewalk) — $6.84 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $8.2 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. All other widths will be rorated accordingly. New construction
(where no walk existed) — 100% o the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $3.10 per square f ot.
All corner residential propertie will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sid walk along and abutting the "long side" of
the property.
1
MULTI — RESIDENTIAL (More than three family structures), NON RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100% of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.15 per square f ot.
1
under Preliminary Order \ y — approved Mq aS 1 lggLI
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a blic hearing
upon the above improvement, d e notice thereof having been given as
prescribed by the City Charter; nd
WHEREAS, The Council has heard all persons, objections and
recommendations pertaining to said proposed improvement and has fully
considered the same; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Council )f the City of Saint Paul does hereby order
that the above — described improvement be made, and the proper City officers
are hereby directed and authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That upon the completion of said improvement, the
proper City officers shall calculate all expenses incurred therein and shall
report the same to the City Council in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City
Charter.
COUNCILPERSONS Adopted by Council: Dat- C L
Yeas Nays A,h -K-t
vBlakey / Cer ' ie. Passe by I ncil Secretary
Grimm
(/
pelerin
Harris V SIn Favor B /ere • ��L�
Alift.
aregard ; ttman 0 Against / ��;,, iri —° .
,'hune Mayor
Z Ptb
114 Httit't ' "Plc t~ae" ° ' .fig l RE 5 -13 -94
DEPARTMENVOFFICFJCOUNCa. DATE INITIATED "R EEN S H E E N 0 . ' ' 441-2°
Pudic Works Sidewalks 4-26 -94 INITULIDATE INIT ALIt.ATE
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL
Thomas P. Keefe - 266 -6121 ASSIGN FOR ATTORNEY CITY CLERK
MUST BE ON — — ROUTING BUDGET DIRECTOR FIN. Ni MGT. SERVICES DIR.
MAYOR (OR ASSISTANT) COUnCII Resew 1�7
Tome OF SIGNATURE PAGES 1 MAP AU. LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE El ASSOCIATE f ENTAL ACCO
ACTION REQUESTED �j i>a
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 2 (See attached lit)
Pi &@- /Vct • £94"7.1"
RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve (A) or Reject (RN PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING CUESTIONS:
PLANNING COMMISSION ` CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIW 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department?
_ CIS COMMITTEE YES NO
2. Has this person/tirm ever been a city employee?
A STAFF YES NO
DISTRICT COUNCIL e• 3 3. Does this person/lirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCOBJECTIVE? employee?
I.
YES NO
Explain all yea answers on separate sheet and attach to peen sheet
WMO
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE. OPPORTUNITY (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created beci use of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating free/thaw cycles,?
service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temprature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be
addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left I ncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be '
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedesrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private contractors, so II follows that private sector jobs are created as a result of this activity.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simply stated, property owners detest assessment, and despite the fact up to one -half the assessment is City subsidized, it sti(I
remains controversial
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED:
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewak stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits,
ultimately resulting in the expenditure of larger doll tr amounts in eventual repairs and /or replacement, as we I titer ayouts.
VWW
MAY 16 1994
TOTAL. AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ 7, 644.00 COST /REVENUE BUD GWI ED{AIR ONE NO
FUNDING SOURCE 94*3 A P to 94 a 495,000 ACITVITY NUMBER C94- 2T726-078 -27009
FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (EXPLAIN) B,, AST w 400,000
C. CtB 94 * 50,000
/c? / 7y
9L/- /0,3
SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION
Ward 2
S9y25 PROJECT: RECONSTRUCT ; SIDEWALK B.S. W. GEORGE ST. from Ohio St. to
Orleans St. & W.S. OHIO ST. from W. George St. S. 45'.
INITIATING ACTION: This order was initiated by the Director of Public Works as
public necessity on the basis of four (4) complaints and an inspection of the walk.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: This walk is poured concrete with tree heaves, asphalt
patches, disintegrated, scaled, settled and cracked panels.