Council Minutes

Minutes/Committee of the Whole Meeting
Monday, January 10, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.____

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, January 10, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Glassheim (teleconference), Christensen, Kerian, Kreun - 6; absent: Council Member Gershman - 1.

Mayor Brown announced that when addressing the committee to please come forward to use the microphone for the record, and advised that the meeting is being televised live and taped for later broadcast.

Mayor Brown commented on various events held during the past week and upcoming events:

He thanked the community for its support of the World Junior Hockey tournament that ended last week, tremendous opportunity to show those who attended what we are all about, everyone should be proud of the picture we painted for the world to see.
He welcomed back UND students from their Christmas break.
He congratulated the ND Museum of Art at UND that ended a Lewis & Clark Exhibition over the weekend, over 10,000 people had the chance to see the exhibit since it opened in mid-November.
He stated he had the pleasure of congratulating two long-time City employees who have recently retired: Master Police Officer Joe Peterka who retired on January 2 after 31 years of service with the City; Battalion Chief Vince Liddy who worked with the fire department since March 4, 1972. He presented Vince Liddy with a Certificate of Recognition, that he served the City for 31+ years, most recently as Battalion Chief, and that the certificate is presented as an expression of appreciation for services rendered and thanked him from a grateful community. Mr. Liddy stated it has been an honor and privilege to serve on the Grand Forks fire department, is happy to have had the opportunity to do that and that he had the support of his family and the City.

2.1 Application for Class 3 (Off and/or On-Sale Beer and Wine) license by SRJ, Inc.
dba Valley Video Games, 308 DeMers Avenue._____________________________
Council Member Kerian asked for additional information relating to this application, an amusement center (video games, etc.) and how that works in this establishment.

2.2 Lease agreement with Park District for Lincoln Drive Park area of Greenway.
Council Member Kreun stated this is a one-year lease but that as they get closer to the completion of the greenway project, may want to bring that to a ten-year lease. He stated that as they write that lease into a longer term, that they may want to make sure the Park District has the insurance so that everything is covered and also that the City would retain some type of control so that any changes that were made in the landscape or structures wouldn't affect the flood protection project.

2.3 Location and grant applications for South End Boat Ramp Project No. 5663.
Council Member Kreun reported that he attended as part of the Flood Protection Committee a meeting Council Member Gershman had scheduled with the residents to hear some of their concerns re. location of southend boat ramp.

Brad Durick, 1622 South 19th Street, representing the fishing community and fishing organiza-tions in town, stated they favor the Lincoln Drive Park, as they feel it is in a large park and pro- viding access to the greenway, with river as a centerpiece of the greenway; that they have pro-moted the greenway, that it is a beautiful facility and they feel this is the finishing touch to the greenway. There were some concerns being near a neighborhood, but they feel that the Lincoln neighborhood spreads out the traffic on the river, being there is one in East Grand Forks and one on the north end of town; and it would be difficult to get to the ramp if located downtown because of large rigs making left turn off DeMers , would be just as easy to go to East Grand Forks.

Council Member Kreun reviewed background information - this project brought to council 3 years ago and looking at two locations for boat ramps, one on each side of the dam, originally 3 locations designated on the south side of the dam - one downtown, one in Lincoln Park area and one by the former Elks clubhouse, and over process put this decision on hold because of concerns by the neighborhood in Lincoln Drive area - built north end ramp and obtained funds through three funding mechanisms along with some money from betterment from flood protection project, and now back looking at second location on southside of the dam; that there are two locations left, the one at Elks eliminated because of structural requirements to build facility and soil slippage. He stated that some of the concerns the neighbors had in the Lincoln Park area were - increase in traffic, if there are more emg. calls or incidents closer to downtown rather than southend, ability to find location in downtown was better, neighborhood might deteriorate and cause reduction in value of properties.

Glen Hanson, 1202 Reeves Drive, stated the City trying to make this a destination city, which brings along economic development, and to improve and regenerate downtown and what better way than to have a boat ramp there, bring families to businesses and restaurants, etc. The neighborhood is not necessarily concerned about "not in their backyard", but this should be out and away from residential areas, that if it is a destination they are trying to get to, lot easier to get to downtown; that where 13th Ave.S. turns to Lincoln, one car blocks that traffic; if any kind of celebration, emg. vehicles unable to get through, etc. - narrow streets. He also stated noise complaints.

Mark Walker, asst. city engineer, reviewed the comparison listings of pros and cons of both sites, and noted that in looking at flood stage, Lincoln Drive area can be used up to river gauge 48 ft. as compared to the downtown site of 37 ft. He stated they looked at soil stability, both areas are stable and both are good as curvature on the river as outside bend will minimize siltation problems; downtown has 27% slope to the river and would have to cut the riverbank to about a 12% slope and riverbank excavated about 8 ft. on the average. Parking lot and the access road - there is benefit of the downtown area because the existing parking lot can be utilized and be able to build smaller parking lot at that location and get by with a 10-car parking lot allowing overflows to park in the existing lot and would be able to pave the parking lot as opposed to the one at Lincoln, the access road can be short to get there but not able to pave parking lot because that land was purchased with FEMA funds - costs: basically equal.

There was some discussions re. events in Town Square using parking lot and perhaps making it more difficult to get access to ramp area in the downtown area. It was also noted there were about 4 or 5 homes along Lincoln Drive off Belmont, and next block where new homes will be built (in former Almonte Nursing Home area). Mr. Walker stated if lot is filled (16 rigs) overflow parking either on Lincoln Drive or Plum Avenue.

Council Member Christensen noted there is a large paved parking lot in Lincoln Park area - there are a few homes impacted on 13th off from Belmont but can easily manage that issue by not allowing anyone to park along that street, esp. boat trailers, etc. and after expensive tickets and train people not to do that - interested in more input from citizens.

Melanie Parvey-Biby, greenway coordinator, stated she had talked with ND Game & Fish and a representative of their group has stated they can submit two locations if they wish, picking site later in the season and can rank order. She stated they have looked at the sites but haven't taken a position on either site; and would help fund a project at any one of the sites.

Council Member Kreun stated it is important to have a second boat ramp for safety as involves residents and get more activities on there, the more willing the Fish & Game Department is willing to help in cleaning and maintaining the riverway as well.

Chief O'Neill, fire department, in comparing the sites, said there are some advantages to the Lincoln site, more accessible during high waters, silt wouldn't gather as much; downtown has advantage of being quicker at putting a boat in the water, EGF has ramp across river from down-town location and they have never denied fire department of putting a boat in at their location - both sites would work for the fire dept. He stated that most of the drownings have occurred near the dam and have had emergencies on Sorlie Bridge - one of the most dangerous parts of the river can be the ramps themselves. He stated he feels more calls with more activity on the river.

Mayor Brown submitted Council Member Gershman's comments into the minutes.

2.4 Matter of naming Greenway Park Facility - Kannowski Park.
John Staley, Park District, stated the area on South 6th Street was formerly residential area, 5-acre park with restroom, playground equipment and serve as trailhead to that portion of the greenway; Central park will still be there; and there will be flower beds in the park area (peonies).

2.5 Request from Advanced Engineering on behalf of Turning Point, LLC for final approval of a replat of Village Resubdivision No. 4, being a replat of Lots 3 - 11, and Lots 15 and 16, Block B of replat of Block 2, Village Resubdivision No. 2, and Lot G, a replat of Lot A, Block B of the replat of Lot 17 and Lot 20, Block B of the replat of Block 2, Village Resubdivision No. 2 (located west of N. 42nd Street between 5th Ave.N. and University Ave.)_______________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.6 Public hearing and second reading of ordinance relating to Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of Grand Forks City Code of 1987, amending Article 2, Zoning, Section 18--0204, Rules and Definitions, subsection (2), Definitions; Section 18-0301, Signs, subsection (9), paragraph (B) and Appendix F, all relating to ground monument signs. (public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 18).__________
The city auditor noted that the recommendation from Planning and Zoning was to table the request. There were no comments.

2.7 Request for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend zoning map to exclude from R-2 (One and Two Family Residence) District and to include within the R-2 (Single Family Residence) District Lots 21 to 40, Block 2, Block 3 and Block 4, Kelsey's 3rd Addn.; Blocks 1 through 18, excluding Lots 6 to 11, Block 12, and Lots C and D of a Replat of Lot 14 and Lots 23 to 29, Block 17, Swangler Subdivision; Lots 1 to 9, University Park Place Addn.; Lots 13 to 24, Block 17, Westacott's Subdivision; and Blocks 1 and 2, Westwood Subdivision._______________________
Council Member Kerian stated that she was chair of the committee that reviewed this
matter; and reviewed the recommendation that was being submitted by the committee; and the
recommendation was to deny the approval of the zoning ordinance and was also the recommenda-
tion from Planning and Zoning. She stated the remainder of that statement in the recommended
action and after "meeting" should read, "and accept the committee report for further consideration
and action." She stated that the report other than the recommendation not to change the zoning at
this time, is that it does not have concrete recommendations. She stated they explored a lot of
things and people came back with number of concepts and ideas but they all need further
consideration. She asked that the council accept the report and take some action and give some
guidance on what should be done with that report.

She reviewed some of the work the committee did (minutes of meetings are available on website
or at City Hall - It was noted that the report was mailed to all the residents of the area.) The
issues that came out and the problems the neighborhood had were: unable to find parking near
their own homes, late night noisy parties, lots of visitors to the neighborhoods for parties so hours
different than of local families, inadequate rental housing and yard maintenance and properties
not maintained to the standards; and rental and parking ordinances were not enforced; some
uncertainty about how to report problems and carry through with them. She stated in looking at
zoning, found number of problems and did find some concern by even those who had been in
favor but would now under R-1 have the same ability to change either their parking or their house
on their property because of R-1 specifications are different, - what went forward was not to
rezone at this point in time. Committee members came up with 3 areas to look at: 1) possibility
of conservation overlay district in which you would define a neighborhood for some unique
characteristic and try to solve within that neighborhood (infrastructure, limiting population
increases through additional rental property); and would suggest it be followed up on to see if
there are some things that would help in solving some of the things in the area and do some things
that wouldn't impact the rest of the city such as redefining a family unit - number of questions
about what would apply in a given district and apply city-wide and ramifications would that have;
2) the matter of existing ordinances re. parking and regulations on rental units and property are
not fully enforced - that in addition to enforcement some other parking ordinances may manage
the parking better; inspections and permits do need certificate of occupancy and be sure that is
clear to people and work at within the city as to improvement of that, possibly a central one-call
center to resolve that problem; a number of landlords who did not live in the area the expectations
they hold for themselves and tenants and small number of landlords who do cause some of the
concerns in the neighborhood and try inform and make requirements of property owners or
managers who handle problems that come up. 3) Trying to improve communications between
renters and home owners who reside in the neighborhood and understands their rights and
responsibilities and in terms of caring for property and parking, complaints - and didn't see any
clear recommendations but other things that could be carried further. She stated they talked about
how that might be taken forward and if the council accepts this report then some of council
members could serve if the mayor could appoint a task force or steering committee and that the
two members on the committee (Kreun and herself plus Council Member Hamerlik from
neighborhood) may be willing to serve on such a committee to help work with the staff members
and continue to review and make more final recommendations.

2.8 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Crary Developments, Inc. for preliminary approval of the Replat of Lot 1, Block 2, Southbrook First Addn. (loc. south of 48th Ave.S. and between Curran Court)._________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.9 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Southern Estates LLP for preliminary approval of the plat of Southern Estates Fourth Addn. (loc. west of S. 20th St. and north of 44th Ave.S.)_____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.10 2005 Community Development Block Grant Program. (public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 18)._________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.11 Proposed Amendment #2 to the 2004 CDBG Annual Action Plan. (public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 18)._______________________________________
There were no comments.

CITIZEN REQUEST

Karry Kyllo, 1025 Selkirk Circle, stated his community's concern about UND building a bio-
hazard lab in their neighborhood, that Council Member Brooks was at their meeting but they
would like a formal process where the residents in their community have a procedure where
they have input and where information is relayed to them, that they feel that UND isn't relaying
information to them properly and being misled on certain items, that their goal isn't to block the
bio-hazard lab but want more formal involvement in the process because it will affect their
neighborhood, and would like to get some thoughts from council on setting up a formal
panel with member of their community, reps. from UND and council members.

Council Member Hamerlik stated that he lives close to the University and at the time the Bronson
Property was being developed, his community was in contact with the Vice President for Student
Affairs and Outreach and in contact with the President's Office and had meetings quite regularly
about traffic, development and kept neighborhood posted and opportunity for dialogue.

Council Member Brooks stated there was a public meeting held in Clifford Hall with about 70-80
people, that Dean Wilson was there and that grant probably being awarded in the fall; had
discussion and has notes to go over with Mr. Duquette on things they can look at from the City's
standpoint; and after meeting people's concerns hadn't change and he stated they needed another
meeting.

There was some discussion as to ownership of the property on which the facility will be located;
and it was noted that it is owned by one of the Foundations (whether Aerospace or UND
Foundation); and if not State-owned property, the City would have jurisdiction over it. It was
also noted that a University spokesman stated they would be seeking the normal permits from the
City of Grand Forks; and it was noted there will be permitting or zoning process; that the land is
zoned I-2 (Heavy Industrial) and research labs are a permitted use in that zone. Council Member
Christensen stated that if it is a permitted use, how are we going to regulate the use and what are
the concerns the City would have as far as safety issues.

Mr. Kyllo stated their biggest concern is bio containment leak, that the odds are slim that that
could happen but is a possibility a propane explosion so that bio contaminants inside the lab could
be turned into aerosols and spread by water and by the wind, prevailing winds from
north/northwest and if that did happen would contaminate southern part of Grand Forks - is
possible. He stated he wasn't sure why they were locating it in that area, rather than on the south
side of the city or at another location; that Dr. Wilson had stated he wanted it located away from
UND and away from urban development - that their proposed area doesn't meet either one of
those requirements - and residents are concerned.

Council Member Christensen noted that there are two other facilities in the state and asked what
those communities went through in making their decision as to location of the facility. He stated
that before this is permitted and those reviewing the permit should have some information as to
the risks of the facility, and if not there, where, and as people trying to regulate the growth of the
community for everybody, have to have some alternate locations where there won't be future
residents. He stated we should have more information before passing on that and decision points
should be given to Planning and Zoning before they make the first recommendation, and more
dialogue between the groups and when council makes its decision they locate it in the right place.
Mr. Kyllo stated they wanted to make sure that everything is being addressed before it is built.
Mayor Brown stated to facilitate that, asked Pete Haga, community relations officer, to work with
that; and with Mr. Brooks and University and to have discussion with local neighborhood.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Hamerlik stated they noticed when Council Member Glassheim was talking,
system breaking up so hard to understand, last week we had problem listening to Council
Member Gershman, and that we should try to get that fixed.

Tomorrow, January 11, at 3:00 p.m. there will be a meeting of the Special Events Committee in
the council chambers; that there are 16 applications for the available monies.

2) Council Member Glassheim stated that recently there was an item in the paper re. snow
removal and noted that to provide snow removal for the World Juniors, if we put extraordinary
facilities to the Engelstad area and neglected residential areas. Mr. Feland stated it was reported
that City snowplows were plowing between here and Thief River and that was untrue - that the
DOT and the counties between here and Thief River had a designated route for fans and team
buses to get between the two but not City plows; that around the Arena they did major arterials,
Columbia Road and 6th Avenue, but no crews clearing parking lots, did what they normally do,
clearing major arterials and then residential areas.

3) Council Member Kerian questioned status of the fee study which had been discussed last year
during budget time. The city auditor stated they are working with other large cities in the state,
Minot heading that up and we have submitted our information to them and should be getting that
back shortly.

4) Council Member Kreun thanked Mr. Feland for transportation and all the work his department
did during the World Juniors, maybe some confusion because of the coordination they did with
MNDOT and NDDOT and counties, that we did the coordinating but our crews didn't go out and
do the work - and that Mr. Feland and LeahRae Wasvick did an excellent job of running trans-
portation for fans, media and teams; Lt. Sieber did a great job of security with those individuals
throughout World Juniors and with a 10" snow and cold weather, taxed our ability, that we put
people in the Alerus Center - did an excellent job and thanked them for that.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Brooks that
we adjourn. Carried 6 votes affirmative.
Respectfully submitted,
John M. Schmisek, City Auditor