By a vote of 4-2, Grand Forks city council has approved removing a curb-and-gutter requirement for a local housing project.
Chuck Varabioff is planning a 20-lot development on 68th Avenue. He has made a few requests to the city in hopes of getting the lots on the market sooner. Council previously said no to allowing him to use property rather than cash as a security deposit.
Varabioff told council his engineer has designed an alternate drainage system that would be cheaper to implement, but city staff recommended against allowing it.
“Based on the review completed by staff and the third-party engineering consultant, staff have concerns with the proposed removal of curb and gutter,” a memo to council read.
“In particular, the design may increase future maintenance obligations, lifecycle costs, and risks to the long-term performance and service life of the roadway and drainage infrastructure proposed for eventual municipal ownership.”
Varabioff argued his proposed system has been professionally engineered to direct water into “landscaped infiltration areas” at the front of each lot.
“This approach is more environmentally responsible than a traditional curb-and-gutter system, reduces runoff, and aligns with modern low-impact stormwater management practices,” he said in his request.
He also told council that it would save him $100,000 to $150,000.
The city received five emails from the public on the matter, one in support of the variance and four opposed. However, Varabioff said the concerns raised in those messages pointed to problems with a similar development nearby and didn’t address the specific issue at hand.
He also disputed the notion the asphalt won’t last as long without a curb-and-gutter system. “We’re proposing to fill the shoulder with crushed [gravel] and compact it to asphalt level so that it lasts many decades,” he said.
Varabioff is unable to get title to the subdivided lots until paving is complete.
Dan Sahlstrom of WSA Engineering told council the development may be better off without curb-and-gutter because there is no piped storm system, and the alternative will result in more uniform water distribution.
Sahlstrom said similar systems have been used successfully in rural areas. He called the requirement under the city’s bylaw to include curbs and gutters in this case an added expense without an offsetting benefit.
Councillor Deborah Lafleur argued against allowing the variance. “We put bylaws in place for community standards for development,” she said. “It is for the aesthetic of the neighbourhood to have curb and gutter.”
Councillor David Mark said he preferred curbs and gutters, “but we have to think of different solutions all the time. Some things are worth trying.” He said it will cost more if curbs and gutters are added later, but “hopefully we’ll have 20 additional tax folios to help with that.”
City staff confirmed it would be possible to finance such a project through a neighbourhood improvement tax.
Mayor Everett Baker and councillors Christine Thompson and Neil Krog also voted in favour of the variance, while councillor Rod Zielinski was opposed. Councillor Zak Eburne-Stoodley recused himself from the discussion because he lives nearby.
Varabioff said he hopes to have paving completed by the end of September. Had council not granted the variance, he said he would have struggled to come up with the extra money to pay for the curb and gutter work, which would then be passed on to homebuyers.
He said borrowing money for property development is difficult and all his funds are tied up in the project. But he added that regardless of council’s decision, he wasn’t going to walk away.
“My family has been here since the turn of 20th century, so the last thing I want to do is tarnish our name by leaving a project that’s unsightly and unfinished,” he said.
