Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on accelerating action for Houston Avenue bank stabilization; staff urges studies and funding plan
Summary
Houston Avenue residents described losing yards and undermined structures to riverbank erosion and urged immediate stabilization. City staff outlined a three‑phase approach (buyouts, demolition, stabilization) with preliminary cost ranges of $3.35–$4.25 million and recommended forming a working board to compile technical studies and funding for a future bonding request.
Residents of the Houston Avenue neighborhood told Crookston City Council on March 16 that escalating riverbank erosion has damaged yards, decks and outbuildings and places some homes at imminent risk.
Staff briefing: Interim City Administrator Darren Selsler summarized staff contacts with legislators, watershed and engineering partners and presented a three‑phase plan: (1) buyouts of eight affected homes (tax‑value estimate based on county assessments ≈ $1.2 million, but market appraisals could be higher), (2) demolition (estimated $450,000–$850,000 pending asbestos and utility disconnect costs), and (3) riverbank stabilization (engineering estimates range from $1.7 million for some sloping approaches up to $2.5 million for structural anchoring), producing a combined preliminary project estimate of roughly $3.35 million to $4.25 million. Selsler said a comprehensive geotechnical study (borings and lab testing) would be required to refine design and cost; an initial geotechnical study done in 2024 informed the ranges, and a more detailed study could cost $75,000–$100,000.
Residents’ testimony: Several residents described rapid loss of property: Carrie Olsen said, "Since we purchased our home in 1999, we've lost 40 ft of our backyard," and others showed instances of decks or garages undermined by erosion. Residents and watershed representatives warned that delaying action could reduce cheaper sloping options and force more expensive structural solutions.
Funding and timeline: Staff explained Minnesota Management & Budget (MMB) requirements for sponsoring bonding requests (scope, cost, schedule and 50% match in many cases) and said the March deadline for this session was impractical to meet with complete documentation. Staff recommended forming a cross‑stakeholder working board to prepare the MMB packet for a future bonding cycle while pursuing grants and watershed partner contributions; council agreed to create a committee to continue work.
Next steps: Council committed to forming a working board with staff, watershed representatives, residents and engineers to complete geotechnical work, clarify funding options and prepare an MMB or alternative grant applications for the next bonding cycle.
