Council Minutes
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
September 8, 1998
The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in its regular session in the council chambers in City Hall on Tuesday, September 8, 1998 at the hour of 7:30 o’clock p.m. with Mayor Owens presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; absent: none.
Mayor Owens announced that anyone wishing to speak to any item may do so by being recognized prior to a vote being taken on the matter.
SUSPEND AGENDA AND CONSIDER ITEM RE.
FLOOD PROTECTION REPORT
Mayor Owens asked the council to suspend the agenda and allow Mr. Ken Vein, city engineer, to give the flood protection, Shannon & Wilson report. It was moved by Council Member Bouley and seconded by Council Member Hafner to suspend the agenda. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
Ken Vein, city engineer, reported that a copy of the flood protection project city council update dated September 8, 1998 was on their desks and that table of contents have technical work, word of authorization, project financing, acquisitions, greenway and communication information dissemination plan. He stated that the technical work update under the Corps of Engineers will be repetitive from the past, that the draft general reevaluation report and the environmental impact statement are out; copies are available for the public to review at the Public Library and in the Info Center, and a copy has been set aside for council members to check out and review at their convenience. He reported that the Corps contractors have installed equipment near the water treatment plant and this is part of their instrumentation plan to measure water table changes and slide activity along the river, and a more detailed article about this will be in the next flood protection update that's due out next week..
He reported that Mark Meyers, the primary geotechnical engineer with the Corps on our project has notified the City that a slide has occurred just east of Riverside Manor by the Kennedy Bridge and included in report are some pictures of the size of the crack and the slide. He stated that he will talk about a tour that the council would be going on, have a chance to take a look at that, and will probably have to take some of the weight of the bank off and getting some additional information from Mark Meyers, and planning to get that this week.
Mr. Vein reported that Shannon & Wilson were authorized by City staff on August 17 to complete the following work items that were estimated to be in the $17,000 to finish the outstanding part of their previously approved contract, they are reviewing the Corps criteria methodology and will provide comments back to the City; reviewed the Corps plan for geotechnical exploration including instrumentation plan and will provide comments back and review Corps scope of work for their design memorandum on geotechnical issues and provide comments back. He reported he talked to Greg Fisher today about those, and they have just began some of that work and do not have exact timetable of when that would be completed. He reported that at the time Shannon & Wilson were given the notice to proceed, there was little information from the Corps for them to review, much work yet to be accomplished but Mr. Fisher has been sent a copy of the general reevaluation report and EIS and has begun their review of these documents. He reported note from Flood Response that a revised work scope for Shannon & Wilson will be coming at a later time.
Mr. Vein reported that with the alignment issues council and some city staff will be doing a bus tour of the dike alignment this coming Friday, September 11, at 3:30 in front of City Hall. He reported they will be scheduling a series of neighborhood meetings to discuss the issues of how to finance betterments as was directed by Flood Response, the dates and times that have tentatively been planned at this time are included in the report with the first meeting to take place on September 17.
He reported that Item II under WRDA Authorization, the House of Representatives will be back in session tomorrow, word is still being held up with a conflict with a Sacramento Flood Control Project; that the full Senate will have to pass the bill and both houses and senate are targeted to adjourn in early October, and Mayor Owens has sent a second letter to Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich encouraging that WRDA be brought to the floor for a vote before a close of the 105th Congress.
Mr. Vein reported that Item II is project financing under the Federal Appropriation Process total cost estimate is $342 million and don’t expect to see any changes or revisions to that, and that will be the amount that will end up being in the WRDA Authorization Bill, the delegation is trying to get the President to include this as a new start in the FY2000 budget. The State appropriations, no new word on State funding, State Communications Team continues to meet to discuss the best approach to this aspect of the project, the hiring of a legislative coordinator is still being considered and will be discussed further.
Mr. Vein reported that on local funding the Finance Department is coordinating a funding proposal for council to consider in financing the local share of the dike project and dike related changes to the water treatment plant that aren’t included in the Corps’ total project cost. The sludge plant and other components have to be moved because of the dike and that’s why included as a part of this. He reported that the Finance Committee has discussed the sales tax increase of up to a half percent to partially pay for the City’s share of the project, publication requirements preclude the vote from taking place during the November election, special election in early December or January is being considered; the rest of the City’s share could be paid with a citywide special assessment, and the Finance Committee will be coordinating that portion of the funding as well and the issue will be discussed at a finance committee or a committee of the whole.
Mr. Vein reported that Item IV, Acquisition, is for those properties affected by the proposed dike line but not in any other phase of the acquisition program, current status is 81 offers have been made, 7 files closed where people have changed their minds, 24 properties have been acquired and remaining 50 in some stage of the process.
Mr. Vein reported that under the Greenway proposal they have attached an organizational chart for the project showing how the entities will interact during the course of this project, joint powers agreements have begun to be drawn up to define the roles of the various entities. He stated that the City’s external greenway executive technical advisory committee is noted on the chart and has met to discuss and begin formulating the progression of the development of the greenway; the committee discussed the proposal from Greenways, Inc., Charles Flink, which would assist the City and other entities and agencies in developing an action plan for the development of the greenway. He stated that the City’s public works departments has hired a land restortionist to work on the greenway project with Sarah Helleckson, the coordinator.
Mr. Vein stated that under Communication Information Dissemination there will be two open houses for public review and comment on the Corps’ draft, general reevaluation report and EIS report on Tuesday, September 15 from 3:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the civic auditorium and on Wednesday, September 16 from 12:00 noon to 3:00 p.m. at the East Grand Forks City Hall. He stated they are trying to set up a series of neighborhood meetings to discuss the financing of geotechnical betterments where the Corps has identified the alignment geotechnically driven and there is an attached map showing the areas and the number of properties affected by the alignment, invitation letters for the meetings will be sent to those home owners directly impacted and a general meeting notice will be sent to all media, dates and times are a little tentative but try to stick with this as close as possible: Riverside Park area, September 17 at 7:0 p.m. at civic auditorium; Reeves Drive and Lincoln Drive on Tuesday, September 22 at 7:00 p.m.; from 25th Ave. S. and Elmwood Drive area, September 24 at 7:00 p.m. at civic auditorium and Sunbeam or Northridge Hills, Grassy and Loamy Hills area, Tuesday September 29 at 7:00 p.m. at civic auditorium. He stated that another series of meetings they are planning to discuss the interim flood protection project will be scheduled for November or January, prior to any type of flood potential occurring. Copies of this report are available in the back of the room for those in the audience who did not get any, along with maps which will be provided.
Council Member Lunak stated that there could be substitutes in this rather than betterments. Mr. Vein stated that if there is a substitution that occurs that’s not considered a betterment it would be naturally incorporated into the project if it is cheaper, the Corps of Engineers would basically design around that type of a substitution; the only thing he understands that they would actually ask any individual to pay for would be the City or somebody beyond the Corps of Engineers as a part of the project would be if it were more expensive, and less expensive one will be included if that becomes the approved plan.
SUSPEND AGENDA TO CONSIDER THE MATTER OF
FLOOD PROTECTION UPDATE, SHANNON & WILSON
SCOPE OF WORK
Mayor Owens asked the council to suspend the agenda to consider the matter of the flood protection update, Shannon & Wilson scope of work. It was moved by Council Member Bouley
and seconded by Council Member Brooks to suspend the agenda. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
The Flood Response Committee considered the matter of flood protection update, Shannon & Wilson scope of work, and recommended to add Item 11, $1,500, (settlement resulting from drainage) to proposed column and proceed with work as recommended in the amount of $33,000.
It was moved by Council Member Bakken and seconded by Council Member Glassheim that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.
It was moved by Council Member Klave to amend the motion to increase the amount to $58,000 to include all the work that Shannon & Wilson had discussed to be done so that it can all be considered at this time. Council Member Beyer seconded the motion.
Council Member Glassheim questioned whether they want to go ahead with work before the council’s established any goals or criteria for reasonable amount above the costs of buyouts that would be accomplished. Council Member Klave stated he would like to hear from both staff and Shannon & Wilson as they are proceeding to do what they feel needs to be done in a chronological order, that Shannon & Wilson didn’t include dollar figure for the soil borings and tests on the past report; and would be an additional cost but they defined a scope of work to $78,000 and would like to see them accomplish that work so know where we’re at.
Joan Hawthorne, 222 Conklin Avenue, stated that the issue of betterments seems to be confusing the question of whether or not to go ahead with the study, the question of betterments would be a separate issue as Mr. Lunak and Mr. Vein pointed out, and if it turns out that there would be additional costs, then need to decide whether or not we are willing to pay those costs, and that is a decision that the entire community as well as the council needs to be involved in. She stated that now have no reason to think what they’re looking at would even be a betterment, it might be cheaper than what they’re currently looking at, but without the study they’ll never know and this is what’s troubling the people who are concerned about getting a study done.
Council Member Glassheim stated he wanted to read from Shannon & Wilson’s letter of August 27 to Mr. Grotte: 1) is while we believe that the work should be done, most items proposed for delay do not require a specific timetable for completion so that the expert hired of course agrees that those particular items do not need to be done now but if people want them done, can do it but the consultant doesn’t feel that they are crucial, however, he wanted to call attention to something else and it maybe that we should be spending more than $58,000, the question is what they are spending it on, and the thing that Shannon & Wilson underlines is the exception to what he just said which doesn’t matter if delay some of these items, the exception is the installation of the instrumentation. He stated in our opinion it is critical that this work be completed this summer so that the change in groundwater can be recorded over a season of low and high flows, it’s important that the instrumentation be extensive and provide enough repetition to prove a true identification of subservice conditions, and he would be happy to vote $10,000 or $30,000 or $50,000 more to accomplish that, but not sure thing arguing about tonight makes much difference, and would ask Mr. Vein whether we have enough instrumentation, what’s the process for finding out if we have enough, do we need additional money to provide instrumentation or will the Corps be doing that, or when will we know that so know whether we need to provide additional money beyond what we’re talking about tonight.
Mr. Vein stated he has some of the same concerns, the scope that has already been approved has basically requested that Shannon & Wilson review the geotechnical exploration plan that’s been authorized already, and sit down with the Corps and discuss what that plan actually consists of, now to the best of his knowledge, only looking at the work of the water treatment plant and not convinced that’s enough instrumentation but dealing with the Corps, Shannon &Wilson and ourselves try to come to some type of agreement on what is the best and the amount that we need, if for some reason we can get the Corps to actually hire the contractor to do that, that will be cheaper for us, if not and our consultant still continues to think that we need additional instrumentation. would bring that back to the city council and request the additional funding necessary at that time.
Upon call for the question on the amendment to allocate $58,000, and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Hafner, Martinson - 13; voting “nay”: Council Member Bakken - 1. Mayor Owens declared the motion on the amendment carried.
Upon call for the question on the motion, as amended, and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Hafner, Martinson - 13; voting “nay”: Council Member Bakken - 1. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried.
TABLE ORDINANCE RE. CHANGE IN DEFINED
BENEFIT PLAN INDEFINITELY
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance repealing specified sections of Chapter VII of the Grand Forks City Code relating to retirement in General and Pension Plan”, which had been introduced and passed on its
first reading on June 15, 1998, was presented and read for consideration on second reading.
Mr. Swanson reported that the Insurance and Pension Committee did have a presentation by Don Carlson from Dorsey and Whitney at their last meeting, however, the final draft of that plan was not yet available, and would be appropriate at this time if the council would simply table this item indefinitely until such time as the final draft is provided to that committee by the Dorsey Whitney firm.
It was moved by Council Member Polovitz and seconded by Council Member Brooks to table this ordinance indefinitely. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3731, TO ANNEX SOUTH
PINES ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance to annex to the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, South Pines Addition to the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, less portion previously annexed”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on August 17, 1998, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
The city auditor exhibited affidavit of publication of notice to the public that this petition for annexation had been filed with the city council and had been published as required.
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
Upon call for the question of adoption of this ordinance and upon roll call vote the following voted “aye”: Council Member Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Owens declared the ordinance adopted.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3732, TO ANNEX ALL OF
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, LECLERC’S ADDITION TO THE CITY
OF GRAND FORKS
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance to annex to the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, all of Lot 1, Block 1, LeClerc’s Addition to the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on August 17, 1998, and upon which public hearing had been scheduled for this evening, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
The city auditor exhibited affidavit of publication of notice to the public that this petition for annexation had been filed with the city council and had been published as required.
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
Upon call for the question of adoption of this ordinance and upon roll call vote the following voted “aye”: Council Member Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Owens declared the ordinance adopted.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3733, TO AMEND THE
STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN TO INCLUDE PUBLIC
R/W SHOWN AS DEDICATED AND RESERVED ON THE
REPLAT OF LOT 8, COUNTRYSIDE SUBDIVISION
An ordinance to amend the Street and Highway Plan of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, to include the public rights of way shown as dedicated and/or reserved on the Replat of Lot 8, Countryside Subdivision, Grand Forks, North Dakota”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on August 17, 1998, and upon which public hearing had been scheduled for this evening, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage
The city auditor reported that the required legal notice had been published calling for a public hearing to be held on this matter this evening and further that to date no protests or grievances had been filed with his office.
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
The city auditor presented and read the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission who had considered the matter of the request from Bruce Ternes for final approval of a Replat of Lot 8, Countryside Subdivision, Grand Forks County, North Dakota (located at 2733 Prairie Road, which is near the outer edge of the two-mile limit of jurisdiction), and recommended final approval subject to special conditions shown on or attached to the review copy and passage of the ordinance amending the Street and Highway Plan. The recommendation was approved by Council Members Babinchak and Klave.
Upon call for the question of adoption of this ordinance and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Owens declared the ordinance adopted.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.3734, AMENDING ZONING MAP
TO INCLUDE WITHIN I-2 (HEAVY INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT
ALL OF LOT B, HARTY’S SECOND RESUBDIVISION
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance to amend the Zoning Map of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, to rezone and exclude from the B-3 (General Business) District and to include within the I-2 (Heavy Industrial) District, all of Lot B, Harty’s Second Resubdivision to the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on August 17, 1998, and upon which public hearing had been scheduled for this evening, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
The city auditor reported that the required legal notice had been published calling for a public hearing to be held on this matter this evening and further that to date no protests or grievances had been filed with his office.
Mayor Owens called for the public hearing. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed.
The city auditor presented and read the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission that they had considered the matter of the request from Terry Rogers on behalf of Terry Rogers Construction, Inc. for final approval of an ordinance to amend the Zoning Map to exclude from the B-3 (General Business) District an to include within the I-2 (Heavy Industrial) district all of Lot B, less the westerly 30 feet thereof, Harty’s Second Resubdivision, city of Grand Forks, ND (located at 4330 Gateway Drive, north of Mini-Mart), and recommended final approval and passage of the ordinance amending the zoning map. The recommendation was approved by Council Members Babinchak and Klave.
Upon call for the question on the adoption of the ordinance and upon voice vote, the following
voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Owens declared the ordinance adopted.
DEFEAT TIE VOTE IN CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE
RELATING TO ZONING REGULATIONS, R-5 (MOBILE HOME RESIDENCE) DISTRICT YARD REQUIREMENT RE. DISTANCE BETWEEN UNITS (ORDINANCE NO. 3725)
The city auditor presented the matter of breaking tie vote in consideration of an ordinance relating to zoning regulations R-5 (Mobile Home Residence) District yard requirements re. distance between units, that this is an item coming back based on a tie vote from a previous meeting, August 17, 1998.
Howard Swanson, city attorney, stated that an opinion he drafted dated August 27, 1998 and is on their desks, that at the last meeting as a result of a tie vote the question was whether the Mayor could vote on the adoption of an ordinance, that after researching the matter, it is his opinion that not only the mayor can vote but she’s obligated to cast a vote to break the tie. He reported that the public hearing on this item has been closed and the council debate has been concluded, and the only item remaining is for the mayor to publicly declare her vote in breaking that tie.
Mr. Swanson reported that the matter before this body was the adoption of an ordinance, and if the ordinance were adopted (a yes vote), the setbacks would be changed from 15 ft. to 20 ft., and if the ordinance were defeated (a no vote), the setback would remain at 15 ft. Mayor Owens cast her vote as no. It was noted that with that vote, the ordinance change is defeated.
HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON REQUEST FOR
ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX EXEMPTION DISTRICT TO
ASSIST IN DEVELOPMENT OF THE FORMER SOUTH
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 1224 WALNUT STREET
The city auditor presented and read the request by MDI Limited Partnership #38 for a 10-year real property tax exemption pursuant to NDCC 40-58-201(11) , with the proposed development to consist of the substandard rehabilitation of facilities located at 1224 Walnut Street to create 45 units of senior housing. He exhibited copy of the affidavit of publication calling for the public hearing to be held this evening, and reported that no grievances had been filed with his office.
Mayor Owens called for the public hearing.
Chris Greenberg, 1204 Walnut Street, appeared in support of the project and stated that the neighborhood in general is in favor of the development of this property, and asked council to support them.
Ms. Stennes, executive director of the Association stated that many seniors are looking for affordable
housing and would be very interested in this project, and asked they support the project.
Dixie Evans, 1201 Walnut Street, stated she and her husband, support what MetroPlains is doing.
Gary Stenson, proposed developer of the South Middle School, and Jeannie Kelsey, development coordinator, who have been working on this development for the last ten months when knew the school was going to become available, talked to staff and council people about doing basically the same thing with that property that they did with the old St. Anne’s, which is now Riverside Manor. He stated that Riverside Manor was developed into 38 apartments for seniors, 55 and older, about 30 of the apartments are affordable and rest are market rate; and talked about using the same types of financing programs for this property. He stated they originally asked for the same percentages here, but costs have increased quite a bit since they did Riverside Manor in 1994. He stated that after various discussion and meetings they were at about 10-year tax abatement but only 50% of the taxes so would be paying $19,000/year, and that would amount to $190,000 abatement over the 10 years or present value of that is approx. $150,000 and that there are HOME funds that were recommended by the Urban Development Committee of $465,000, and total of that package would be about $615,000 divided by the 45 apartments at South Jr. High amounts to about $13,700 as opposed to the $17,000 from Riverside Manor. He stated that the deadline has been extended twice and can’t extend again, ND Housing Finance Agency is the reservation of the housing tax credits, and that deadline is the 14th of this month, or Monday. He stated they have been here for several meetings and there’s been a lot of discussion on the issue but that’s the deadline they have and would have to give back the affordable housing tax credits and basically all of the financing on a $4 million project unwinds at that point.
Mayor Owens closed the public hearing.
The city auditor presented and read the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission to whom was referred the matter of the request from Randy Schold on behalf of MDI Limited Partnership #38 for a determination as to whether or not the property at 1224 Walnut Street (former South Junior High School) to be described as Lots A and B, Block 1 of a Replat of Lots 19 through 34, Block 1, Lincoln Park View Addition, Grand Forks, North Dakota, including vacated alley adjacent thereto, is a slum and/or blighted area; that the proposed development or renewal plan is in conformity with the general plan or comprehensive plan of the municipality as a whole and approval of the creation of an urban renewal district boundary for establishing a TIF (tax increment financing) project for redevelopment purposes; and recommended that the site is a blighted area, that the proposed redevelopment is in conformance with the City’s comprehensive plan and that the proposed use is consistent with existing zoning for the site; and also approval of the creation of an urban renewal district boundary for establishing a TIF (Tax Increment Financing) Project for redevelopment purposes.
It was moved by Council Member Polovitz and seconded by Council Member Lucke that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
Committee No. 4, Urban Development , considered the matter of South Jr. High School project, and recommended to approve HOME funds in the amount of $465,000 grant and forward to finance committee to figure out the tax abatement. It was moved by Council Member Polovitz and seconded by Council Member Glassheim that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.
Committee No. 1, Finance, reported having considered the matter of tax exemption for South Middle School project, and recommended a 2-year 50% exemption. It was moved by Council Member Carpenter and seconded by Council Member Babinchak that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.
Council Member Lucke asked if the offer would be reasonable, with the two-year 50%. Ms. Kelsey stated that would not be feasible, that they need a 10-year at 50%.
Council Member Carpenter stated he wasn’t sure he supported the Urban Development recommendation of the $465,000 because the cost of the units for rehabilitation is over-stated. He stated that based on information that he’s been able to gather, $19,000 a unit is expensive. He stated that as they dealt with the recommendation for the Finance Committee, he made the motion for two-years, and believes that the operating expenses are grossly overstated He stated they want to develop housing but the question is at what cost of public dollars.
Mr. Stenson stated that the project wouldn’t be done without the funding. He stated that the cost of operating the project are based exactly on what it costs them to operate Riverside Manor, and that’s consistent with the other 4,000 housing units they manage in the midwest, that probably can operate it cheaper but that isn’t the way they operate real estate, that they want a nice facility that is well maintained, well staffed, and dealing with people 55 and older. He stated that control of developer’s fees is done by agency set up to do that, the ND Housing Finance Agency, and they’re the ones who have to review all the sources of funding, including local, federal and state funding and make sure that excess developer’s fees are not paid; that they have maximums on those and are well under that maximum.
John O’Leary, director of Urban Development Office, stated that the this can be made either as loan or grant, how you structure the HOME funds is entirely up to this body, the thinking behind the Urban Development Committee’s recommendation was to convert from a loan to a grant in hopes of trying to get the money back into the general fund because that’s where City needs it now; that they have prerogative to structure it back to original request with a 10-year tax exemption. He stated if structured as a loan those funds don't go back into the general fund, they go back to a targeted program, and way structured now it will go back into the general fund and city council have more flexibility on what to do with the revenues.
It was moved by Council Member Polovitz and seconded by Council Member Lunak to introduce a substitute motion to approve a $465,000 HOME loan and to allow a 10-year 50% tax abatement.
The city auditor stated that he had asked Mr. Swanson whether in establishing a tax exemption they could revisit it, in setting a time period or setting the cap for the total dollars so that if any growth in valuation, growth in mill levy, etc. gets you to that dollar amount quicker. Mr. Swanson reported that he had advised the finance committee that you only have the opportunity to consider the tax exemption application at one time, would not have the ability to act upon it tonight and at a future date, however, it appears possible under the Statutes that you could provide an exemption based upon a net tax savings or combination of years and net tax savings with a maximum, and may or may not be an option.
After further discussion it was moved by Council Member Carpenter and seconded by Council Member Hafner to amend the substitute motion to make years 1 through 5 a 50% exemption and years 6 through 10 a 25% exemption.
Upon call for the question on the amendment to the substitute motion and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Bakken, Hafner - 9; voting “nay”: Council Members Polovitz, Glassheim, Beyer, Babinchak, Martinson - 5. Mayor Owens declared the amendment approved.
Upon call for the question on the substitute motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried;
Council Member Carpenter voted against the motion.
ADOPT RESOLUTION VACATING ALL OF CUL-DE-SAC
OR TURN-AROUND LYING WITHIN BLOCK 31, TOWN
OF GRAND FORKS, NOT PREVIOUSLY VACATED
The city auditor reported that pursuant to instructions by the city council after having received a petition to vacate the cul-de-sac or turn-around lying within Block 31, town of Grand Forks, not previously vacated, said cul-de-sac or turn-around as platted in the plat of the Town of Grand Forks, adjoining Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Block 31, city of Grand Forks, the required legal notice had been published calling for a public hearing to be held this evening, and further that no protests or grievances had been filed with the auditor’s office.
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Babinchak that we do hereby find and determine an insufficiency of protest to the proposed vacation. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
Council Member Beyer introduced the following resolution which was presented and read: Document No. 7626 - Resolution.
It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Babinchak that this resolution be and is hereby adopted. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
DETERMINE INSUFFICENCY OF PROTEST ON PAVING
DISTRICT NO. 560, PROJECT NO. 4225.2
The city auditor reported that the period for filing protests on the resolution of necessity for the improvements in and for Paving District No. 560, Project No. 4225.2, construction of pavement on South Washington Street from 32nd Avenue south to 40th Avenue South, had expired on September 8, 1998, and that he had received no written protests.
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Lunak that we do hereby find and determine an insufficiency of protest to the proposed project. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
Council Member Hafner introduced the following resolution as to protests which was presented and read: Document No. 7627 - Resolution.
It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Lunak that we do hereby find and determine an insufficiency of protest against Paving District No. 560, Project No. 4225.2, as no protests were filed, and further that the resolution be and is hereby adopted. Carried 14 votes affirmative.
CONCUR WITH NORTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION IN AWARD OF PAVING PROJECT
NO. 4225.2, DISTRICT NO. 560, STATE PROJECT NO.
SU-6-986(042)045, U-CMU-6-081(030)941 AND
TEU-6-081(038)941
The city auditor reported that tabulation of bids for construction of Projects SU-6-986(042)045, U-CMU-6-081(030)941 and TEU-6-081(038)941, South Washington Street from 26th Avenue South to 40th Avenue South in Grand Forks, City Project No. 4225.2, District No. 560, had been received by the ND Department of Transportation at their bid opening on August 21, 1998, and that the low bid for the Reconstruction, Grading, Surfacing, Sewer, Structure, Signals, Lighting, Signing, Marking and Incidentals was submitted by Strata Corporation of Grand Forks, ND in the amount of $5,979,751.80, and requested concurrence from the City of Grand Forks prior to award of the bid. He also noted that the communication from the Department of Transportation stated that according to the agreement with the City of Grand Forks, the City’s share for Project SU-6-986(042)045 is estimated to be $651,247 and for Project U-CMU-6-081(030)941 is estimated to be $497,883 and for Project TEU-6-081(038)941 is estimated to be $50,520 for a total of $1,199,650.
Committee No. 3, Public Service, reported having considered the construction bids for various projects: Project No. 4225.2, District No. 560, paving South Washington Street from 32nd Avenue South to 40th Avenue South, and Project No. 4655, paving South Washington Street from 26th Avenue South to 32nd Avenue South, and recommended to accept the bid from Strata Corporation in the amount of $5,979,8751.80, contingent upon Department of Transportation approval and $121,000 of CDBG for the storm sewer on 40th Avenue South.
It was moved by Council Member Lucke and seconded by Council Member Klave that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried.
COUNCIL MEMBERS LUNAK AND MARTINSON EXCUSED
APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR BUILDING PERMITS
TO MOVE BUILDINGS TO VARIOUS LOCATIONS
The city auditor reported that the notice of public hearing on the application by Joe A. Byram to move a building from a) 1501 North 3rd Street to 115 Seward Avenue to be used as storage has been published and posted as required.
The city auditor reported that the notice of public hearing on the following applications for moving permits had been published and posted as required:
b) move house from 10 Fenton Avenue to 1520 North 6th Street
c) move house from 102 Conklin to 405 Alpha
d) move house from 57 4th Avenue South to 614 South 4th Street
e) move house from 1119 Almonte Avenue to 905 Chestnut Street
f) move house from 7 Euclid to 812 Almonte Avenue
g) move house from 1604 Lewis Blvd. to 102 Conklin Avenue
h) move house from 1614 Lewis Blvd. to 1823 North 4th Street
i) move house from 1628 Lewis Blvd. to 1826 North 6th Street
j) move house from 1518 Riverside Drive to 10 Fenton Avenue
Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter.
Marci Glessner, 901 Chestnut Street, stated that there is an application to move house from 1119 Almonte to 905 Chestnut street, adjacent to their house, that the former house was demolished the beginning of August; and that neighborhood took it upon themselves to take care of the yard. She stated the house they are intending to move to this location will fit onto the 30 ft. lot and does have historical value but the outside of the house is in bad shape, and asked who was going to be responsible for fixing up the outside of the house, and making sure the inside gets up to Code (building had main floor damage), and when would house be moved and repairs done. She stated that earlier they wanted to keep 15 ft. between mobile homes but that’s about the amount of space between their house and house being moved in. She stated their neighborhood is trying to get back on its feet, doing a lot of home repairs and that they just got rid of an “eyesore” and do not want another one.
Council Member Hafner stated that the Office of Urban Development will restore the exterior of that house, but had some concern re. the 30 ft. lot. Mr. O’Leary stated he didn’t believe any of these lots were 30 ft. lots, and if in fact it is, that’s not an appropriate lot for them to move a house to, and would take that back to committee for further consideration.
Robert Frazier, 111 8th Avenue South, spoke in regards to moving a house from 7 Euclid to 812 Almonte, his property is adjacent to lot where this house is to be moved, and raised questions as to the size of the house to be moved in, house is larger and doesn’t see where it would be situated on the lot. He stated he’s not in objection to a house being moved to that lot, but thinks the house being proposed is too large and if a smaller house or one of equal size to one that is there would be fine. He stated he has requested in the past since last summer knowing that this house was going to be purchased, that he was willing to buy that property and maintain that property and as of yet has heard nothing back. He stated he would like more information before these houses are moved onto these properties as to safety factors, what repairs will be done to bring up to Code.
Mike Swendsied, 1825 North 4th Street, stated they live adjacent to one of the aforementioned properties, 1823 North 4th Street, and that he believes it would be fiscally expedient to rehab the present house at its location, and that house fits in perfect with the neighborhood because built at the same time, and would like council to look into expenses of moving proposed house, building basement, etc. and also the cost of rehabbing the existing house at its location.