Committee Minutes

Grand Forks Historical Preservation Commission
1405 First Avenue North
Grand Forks, ND 58203
701-772-8756
Minutes
7:00 p.m.
May 11, 2004
Grand Forks City Hall


Present: Marsha Gunderson (Chair), Dave Beach, Chuck Flemmer, Gordon Iseminger, Ted Jelliff, Melinda Leach, Randy Lee, Rolf Ottum, Ken Polovitz
Others: Curt Siewert, Office of Urban Development (OUD)

Minutes of the April 27, 2004 meeting were distributed.

Grand Forks Infill Housing Program – Curt Siewert
Siewert explained the infill program: why there are vacant lots available, how proposals are submitted and the job of the review committee. He presented, for review, six projects that have been approved by the review committee and are scheduled to go to the Committee of the Whole on May 17. Siewert requested concurrence in a determination of ‘no historic properties affected’ for each project.
§ 309 N. 7th St. – a CMI proposal for 16’ wide house on a 25’ lot.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Jelliff, Polovitz)
Motion carries.
§ 505-507 N. 4th St. – a Wally Rodgers proposal for a 50’ lot. The house will be the same as the completed house at 723 N. 5th St.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Polovitz, Lee)
Motion carries.
§ 420 N. 5th St. - a Wally Rodgers proposal for a 50’ lot. The house will be the same as the completed house at 723 N. 5th St.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Iseminger, Lee)
Motion carries.
§ 626 6th Ave. S. - a Wally Rodgers proposal for a 50’ lot. The house will be the same as the completed house at 723 N. 5th St.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Lee, Polovitz)
Motion carries.
§ 523 Cherry Street – an Andy Swanson proposal for a 50’ lot. This lot is shallower than the others. The house will be the same as the completed house at 1512 University Avenue except it will have a wraparound porch.


Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Polovitz, Lee)
Motion carries.
§ 1312 2nd Avenue N. – a Rick Johnson proposal for a 50’lot. The house will be the same as the completed house on the corner of 13th Avenue South and S. 10th St. No HOME funds are being used for this project.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan. (Polovitz, Flemmer)
Motion carries.

CDBG Project – Curt Siewert
§ Bus Shelter at 6th Ave. N. and N. 43rd St.
Motion: to concur that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed plan.
(Lee, Ottum)
Motion carries.

Almonte Infill Project – Rolf Ottum
The Almonte Infill Project review committee consists of Councilmember Hal Gershman, neighborhood resident Tom Lander, Urban Development representative Keith Lund and Historic Preservation Commissioner Rolf Ottum. The primary criterion on the Request for Proposals was that the proposed home be compatible with the neighborhood, including rear (alley) access to detached garages. Eight proposals have come in for a total of five lots. Three of the proposals include detached garages.
Gordon Iseminger left the meeting at this point. 7:40 p.m.
Ottum requested direction from the Commission regarding sticking to the guidelines of the RFP which were written to keep the fabric of the neighborhood.
Dale Sickels arrived at the meeting at this point. 7:45 p.m.
All members agreed that maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood was the point of the RFP and the Infill Committee in the first place and that they supported Ottum in his efforts to keep to the criteria of the RFP.

Long Term Planning
General discussion encompassed the following items:
§ Is a five year plan the right length? Beach noted that the City plans are for five years, continuously. Polovitz said Aerospace plans for ten years and UND has a five year plan. Most plans have large goals with smaller objectives included within. The plan simply serves as a guideline and should be flexible. It includes provisions for longer term issues and includes a plan for planning.
§ Mapping: when annexations to the city occur.
§ Mapping: ascertaining when specific structures or areas will be coming up on 50 years old.
§ Tours: development and promotion of historic tours of the City. This is entrepreneurial and requires a financial risk and time commitment. It needs to be done, but actually conducting tours may not fall within the purview of the commission.
§ Education: put brochures at the Planning Office for properties that are more than 50 years old; these could have explanations as well as website information for sites that could provide information for historic renovation, etc.
§ Education: develop a video or publication of all HPC has accomplished since the flood. This would explain mitigation monies and how we did what we did, why we did what we did and the outcomes. This could also be done on a webpage.
§ Education: develop input into zoning.
§ Education: develop a website which would link to the city website. Perhaps we could start an internship for graphic design majors to assist with the building and maintenance of the website.
§ Education: become more involved with the history of the University. UND was part of the development of the city and, as such, is our concern.
§ Education: develop/print historic brochures for inclusion in the packets for the World Juniors; including a list of all National Register properties.
§ Education: Near Southside Historic District brochure development.
§ Education: awareness building; look for things where you don’t expect to find them (e.g. a small building that’s really old and original but hiding on the back of a lot or surrounded by new properties).
§ Watchdog: We were caught off guard by the Birkholz farm sale. Could this property have been saved if someone had been vigilant? We need to make people aware that what they have is special.
§ Watchdog: UND has options on houses north of University Avenue. Some of these houses could be historic. Obviously, UND doesn’t have the options on them to restore them but rather to use the space for something else.
§ “Welcome Wagon”: when historic properties change hands someone should visit with new owners to be sure they know what makes their property significant and to offer expertise if they are planning changes.
Long term planning discussion will continue at the next meeting.

Chair Report – Marsha Gunderson
§ CLG Conference – Gunderson thanked everyone for attending. Members agreed that the conference was very well done.
§ DDRB – no update.
§ 112-120 N. 3rd St. – the nomination is just about ready for its trip to the Keeper.
§ SHSND/Beautification grants: HCP did not receive monies from the State for this project, but we do have funding coming from Beautification and members concurred that we should proceed on the first couple of plaques.

Motion: to adjourn. (Polovitz, Flemmer)
Motion carries. Meeting adjourned. 9:15 p.m.
The next regular meeting will be at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 25, in room A101, City Hall.


Respectfully submitted,



Peg O’Leary
Coordinator