Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View EDA November 14, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 8 <br /> <br /> 296 <br />Commissioner Thomas stressed that the EDA is not just talking about purchase and if there is 297 <br />something the developer needs assistance with to make it work, they should talk to the EDA. 298 <br /> 299 <br />Ms. Kilvang stated the message is clear that County Road 10 is the priority for redevelopment. 300 <br />She suggested the EDA think about setting their vision beyond the infrastructure so if an 301 <br />opportunity comes forward with a property like the Donut Connection or Moundsview Square 302 <br />that is owned by Krause Anderson, they can take advantage. She noted the EDA has now 303 <br />identified three major projects. 304 <br /> 305 <br />B. Resolution 05-EDA-210 Authorizing the Demolition of 7861 Groveland Road 306 <br /> 307 <br />Community Development Director Ericson stated this is a request for authorization from the 308 <br />EDA to accept a bid to demolish the house at 7861 Groveland Road that the City acquired in 309 <br />2000, tried to rent out but that didn’t work. The building has now been vacant for several years, 310 <br />there has been vandalism, so it has become a liability. Director Ericson advised that there are 311 <br />good neighbors who let the City know if there is a problem but staff recommends the City 312 <br />explore demolition. He noted three bids were received but came in somewhat high. If approved, 313 <br />the site would be restored to a natural level condition with the basement filled in and the ground 314 <br />sodded or seeded. Staff recommends approval. 315 <br /> 316 <br />Vice President Stigney stated the report indicates that efforts were made to sell the house and 317 <br />move it. He asked if the house was advertised for free. Director Ericson stated they have and 318 <br />also contacted moving companies but he does not recall if it was advertised in the last year. He 319 <br />explained the problem with trying to move it anywhere into the metro area is that the building 320 <br />has to come up to current codes, which the building is not able to meet. So, it would have to be 321 <br />moved beyond the metropolitan area. In addition, it may not survive the move and the valuation 322 <br />is not high enough. 323 <br /> 324 <br />Vice President Stigney asked about the new furnace. Director Ericson stated that anything of 325 <br />value can be salvaged. He stated some money may have been put into this house to rent it out, 326 <br />but a new furnace was not purchased. In addition, the appliances have been removed from the 327 <br />building. Vice President Stigney asked that the furnace be removed if it is new. 328 <br /> 329 <br />Commissioner Thomas asked about the asbestos issue. Director Ericson stated the old linoleum 330 <br />floor tile may have asbestos but they do not expect it to be significant. 331 <br /> 332 <br />Commissioner Flaherty agreed the demolition price seems to be high, noting the demolition of 333 <br />two other structures were in the area of $8,000. He asked why there is such a disparity in the 334 <br />demolition bids for this home that contains about the same square footage. He also asked when 335 <br />was the last time the house was rented. 336 <br /> 337