City of Minot braces for big bill to move Home Sweet Home
Trending
As the city prepares to spend an estimated $600,000 to move the former Home Sweet Home building across the street, Minot City Council members lament that they could find better ways to use the city's resilience money.
The State Historic Preservation Officer has instructed the city to move the building rather than tear it down to make way for the flood protection project. The city recently purchased the 119-year-old house that had been used as a gift shop.
John Zakian, manager of Minot's National Disaster Resilience Program, told the council members - meeting as Committee of the Whole Wednesday - that the high moving cost is an estimate based on the requirement that the building's exterior be preserved. He said the building is in better structural shape than originally thought, but special steps and precautions must be taken in the move that raise the cost. Asbestos removal also is required.
Funding for the move would come from funds awarded to the city in the National Disaster Resilience grant.
The two and a half story house at 103 4th Ave. NW is not on any historic registry, Zakian said. So once moved, it is not eligible for any of the tax credits offered for repairs or improvements to an historic structure.
"Just because SHPO decides something is historic doesn't mean it's eligible for any of the benefits, and currently it is not," he said.
City Manager Tom Barry said the intention of the city is to sell the house once it is moved. It is not handicapped-accessible or useful for repurposing by the city.
"This, to me, is an incredible absurdity and waste of dollars," said council member Shannon Straight, who voiced concern that federal auditors of the resilience program would see it that way as well.
Barry said the city sought reconsideration by the historic preservation officer but was unsuccessful, despite the building's lack of any historic certification or registry. Once its preservation became tied into environmental reviews for the flood protection project, the city backed away rather than risk delay to flood control, he said.
"We are disturbed by this, but we have given it our level best in terms of finding an alternative course that would be more effective for our community," he said.
The committee voted 6-1 to recommend the council call for bids from movers. Council member Mark Jantzer cast the only vote in opposition.
The committee also is recommending the council amend its contract with CPS Engineering to include up to $129,326 for a landfill siting and cost analysis.
In the face of public opposition to rezoning two quarters of land for a landfill expansion, the city took a step back to give the matter further study. The Public Works Department is proposing a siting analysis to pick some potential locations for a new landfill. Once a couple of sites are located that meet state requirements, a cost analysis can be performed to provide a more detailed estimate of costs for a new site versus an expansion.
In other business, the committee:
- voted to recommend the council approve a change order to add $120,585 to the spending of resilience funds on renovations on Park South Apartments. The program set aside just over $20 million of the federal grant money for multi-family housing, of which $1.85 million previously had been committed to Park South. Unexpected findings during construction led to a change in cost. The committee is recommending covering a portion of that extra cost.
- heard a presentation from Lance Meyer, city engineer, on a new GIS program that will give residents more detailed, timely information on construction projects. The program will be able to map a variety of data in a more user-friendly format once fully developed.
- reviewed a letter by the city manager in response to a resident of the Heidrich Homes neighborhood who sought recourse from the city for defects in home construction due to alleged deficiencies in city building inspection. The city stated it will not be taking any action but urged concerned homeowners to seek recourse from the contractor. Homeowners have previously stated the contractor's bankruptcy has limited their options.