Grand Forks City Council members debate plan to renovate former water treatment plant site

Yahoo

13-05-2025

May 12—GRAND FORKS — A proposal to raze the former water treatment plant and in its place build an "amenity-rich development project" that highlights the city's connection to the Red River sparked an 80-minute debate among City Council members Monday.
Specifically at issue was the expanse and scope of the project and not necessarily just the decision to tear down the decommissioned plant, which sits on prime real estate on the south edge of Grand Forks' downtown.
During Monday's Committee of the Whole meeting at City Hall, Matt Wetli, of St. Louis-based Development Strategies, Inc., presented the latest news on the proposal, which his company calls a "truly transformative project to redevelop the downtown water treatment plant site." The company's goal was twofold, according to documents presented to the council: To create "a market-supported vision for an amenity-rich development project" and also "to create a district strategy that builds on the catalytic potential of the project."
The Committee of the Whole includes all members of City Council but conducts meetings generally to gather information and plan for future council meetings, similar to other elected bodies' working sessions. In a unanimous decision, committee members voted to receive and accept the report, but did not authorize any further action on the project.
Development Strategies has so far been paid roughly $250,000 for its work, with another $10,000 expected to be paid out in the coming weeks. The cap for the company is $260,000, although another $100,000 was proposed to move on to Phase 2 of the project, although with Monday's decision to receive and file, that won't happen — at least for now. For the sake of this project, Development Strategies is strictly a planning organization and would not be involved in actual development.
The company prefers a concept that would see a development rise — literally — from the ground up, after demolition of the current building. The proposed building would be placed on a higher level than the plant currently sits, thus allowing a full range of views of the confluence of the Red River and Red Lake River, from which the city takes its name.
The $109 million project presented Monday — nicknamed "Hi Point" by the company — would include multifamily development with a mix of uses on the ground floor. Additionally, "a small, but realistic, amount of retail, dining and entertainment uses are integrated into the development to support residents, neighbors and visitors to the site," according to company documents.
Since it would be a raised development, one option would see the current flood wall removed, to be replaced by a sloping earthen dike, pending approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. That sloped approach would allow for what Wetli called an "elevated amenity deck" that would feature greater views of the river forks and access to the nearby Greenway.
The next step would have involved inviting requests for qualifications and then requests for proposals, followed by demolition of the decommissioned treatment plant and development of a master plan. However, that won't happen after Monday's decision to receive and file.
"We think this would create a great opportunity for commerce and this would create a destination that we think would bring people downtown today that maybe don't come downtown a lot," Wetli told council members. "This is a true regional destination because of how special we think this space is and how special you all believe this space would be. So many of you all told us 'views of the river, access to that Greenway.' We wholeheartedly agree and we see that playing out in city after city."
City Administrator Todd Feland said a local steering committee "wanted something bold and everlasting." The group wanted to be realistic, but "at the same time, we didn't want to go small." He spoke of the legacy of the site, noting its years of city use during times of community growth.
In addition, Feland told council members, the city also could possibly purchase two adjacent properties in order to make even more room for the project and expansion. Approximately $6 million — from a state revolving loan fund — has been set aside for the demolition of the plant.
Mayor Brandon Bochenski said the possibility of a TIF — or tax increment financing — for the project would be important. At present, the property brings in no property tax revenue; developing it would change that, he said.
"This is new revenue without a new expense," he said. "Granted, the public spaces would have some maintenance and upkeep expenses ... but for the most part, we don't have to hire more police, more fire, more street plows. All of that extra revenue (from future taxation) is going to be coming back to the city."
At that point, council member Rebecca Osowski raised several questions about the project's scope, intention and costs.
Among them: She sought clarification on how much the city has paid Development Strategies and asked "are we going to have to pay them more?" she said.
Feland's answer: "What we're proposing is, under Phase 2, it would be ... a max to $100,000."
Osowski said that seems expensive, but Feland explained that it generally follows market rate.
She continued: "I guess when I voted to approve hiring these folks, this was not at all what I expected. I think there were multiple comments on the council that we want owner-occupied buildings here and I didn't see any of that presented at all. What I see is the biggest, grandest thing that you can put on that property."
Osowski also does not agree with buying out nearby properties, and said the proposal of closing and roads (Fourth Street) and elevating the property "are things that I think we cannot afford at all."
She also said the plan looks like "Epic 2.0," referring to the troubled Epic company, which filed for bankruptcy during its development of a property — which also includes a public-use space — on the western edge of downtown.
"We already have public space we just cannot take care of," she said. "We have the Downtown Association taking care of our Town Square right now because our city staff just doesn't have the time or energy to do it."
Osowski prefers the water treatment plant area be developed for single-family homes or duplexes, not more apartments. She does, however, like the idea of more public trails or low-cost and low-maintenance amenities in the Greenway.
"I disagree with this 100%. I think it will turn into another Epic failure," she said, saying that the city has other projects that aren't yet complete. "I would like to see some homeownership and that wasn't even brought up."
To Osowski's remarks, Feland said "I think we have so many positive things going on in our community, so I don't agree with those sentiments that we have this negative energy going on. In fact, we have positive energy in this community. I don't buy into those comments."
He said the city directed the committee and Development Strategies to come back with various ideas, rather than "one thing or another." He said they investigated other options, too. He also believes it's important to determine what the concept will be before demolition of the plant, since various plans could result in differing processes to bring down the current building.
Even if the council someday approves, he said, the project is probably several years down the road.
Council member Tricia Lunski then spoke.
"I'm a little angry right now. ... We have so many public spaces in downtown Grand Forks that we have no control over right now," she said. "We don't have anyone who wants to program them — well, that's a lie, because the (Downtown Development Association) wants to program them, but there is nobody else programming events."
She said some residents are doing illegal activities in public spaces, "so why do we want more public spaces to maintain?"
Council President Dana Sande said "we do have a lot of positivity in the community, so we should try to maintain that positivity while still asking hard and reasonable questions."
He also questioned the order of the next proposed steps — sending out a request for qualifications before a request for proposal. "Why would we whittle down the number of people who can respond to our RFP?" he asked.
He said he has advocated for owner-occupied space at the site, since that's the "fastest way to prosperity."
Council member Ken Vein said he "loves the potential for the project" but would like to see more questions answered. Mike Fridolfs said he sees the plan that was presented Monday as one "that would revitalize the whole area."
Bochenski thanked Development Strategies staff for the work they've done and said "it's extremely rude when we have consultants and people come here and get treated poorly for doing the work we've asked them to do."
He said the council's task is to decide "do we want a generational project that gives us the best chance to get our return back when we tear the building down? If we want to have owner-occupied and small density, we have to know we'll be doing that at a loss and we'll lose significant dollars. That's fine, if that's the route the council wants to go."
And one option, the mayor said, is to simply leave the building sitting there, vacant.
"Dying towns across the country do that," he said.
In other news from Monday's meeting:
* The council decided in a 6-1 vote to recommend — for next week's council meeting — a plan to remove a city ordinance that caps the fees that towing companies can charge for removing cars that are illegally parked.
The law was enacted more than a decade ago in response to "incidents reported of towing companies trolling and driving around, waiting for somebody to park in a lot so they can pick it up and tow it away," reported city staff member Sherie Lundmark, saying some of the fees were exorbitant.
It led to the cap, plus the requirement that property owners had to actually call the tow company to make the pickup.
Sande said he was uncomfortable with reverting to the old method, since unscrupulous companies could revert to previous practices. City Attorney Dan Gaustad said a "cleanup item" on the proposal would include that a property owner will still have to make a specific request for a vehicle to be towed.
"With that change, I am OK," Sande said before the vote.
* By unanimous vote, the council approved a charitable gaming machine — to benefit Grand Forks Youth Hockey — to be placed at the Little Bangkok restaurant.
* The council, also in a unanimous vote, approved an amendment for River City Speedway's Class 6 alcohol license (specifically, the entity wishes to add canned cocktails to a drink menu that already includes beer and wine).
* The council also approved, in a unanimous vote, to award a $410,120 electrical contract to Sun Electric Inc. for work on two lift stations. Other companies that applied were not eligible due to missing bid items.