My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-06-15_Agenda
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2004
>
2004-06-15_Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2010 2:28:03 PM
Creation date
3/25/2010 2:25:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/15/2004
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HISTORY OF PROPERTY AT 2012 ELDRIDGE <br />1993 - The city began working with the single family property owner at 2012 Eldridge <br />regarding ongoing property neglect and code deficiencies. The property is mostly vacant <br />and both interior and exterior deferred maintenance has caused neighborhood complaints <br />and concern. <br />1996 – Codes staff worked with the property owner to remove a shed that was falling <br />down and to repair a leaking roof that was covered with a tarp. The vacant property is <br />consistently in violation of the city code regarding length of grass and overgrown <br />shrubbery and many times the City has had the grass cut for the property owner. In <br />addition, there are ongoing issues and inconsistencies with payment of the water bill <br />resulting in late fees. <br />1998- After several years of attempts to work with the property owner, the Council <br />approved a $3,000 abatement to paint the exterior of the home. <br />2002– To help facilitate improvements to the property, the City requested the assistance <br />of the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation (GMHC) to voluntarily purchase the <br />property, using city gap funds, demolish the building and build a new home. GMHC was <br />able to receive permission to enter the home for an inspection from the owner’s son, <br />Frank Wu. After inspection, GMHC made the following conclusions. <br />Severe water damage due to roof leakage and there is extensive mold and <br />wood rot throughout; <br />Evidence of critters nesting in the home (a previously complaint dealt with <br />this also); <br />No basement and only a crawl space with a dirt floor where a large area of the <br />masonry foundation wall has caved in that also has extensive mold issues; <br />The interior floor plan is outdated and has been altered to an extent that <br />relocating of interior walls would be necessary were a new owner to try and <br />remodel; <br />The mechanical systems, electrical, plumbing and HVAC, are outdated and do <br />not appear to be in working order, are poorly located and would need to be <br />replaced; <br />All interior finished surfaces including ceilings, walls and floors would need <br />to be replaced; <br />The bathrooms and kitchen would require new fixtures, cabinets and <br />appliances. <br />Based upon these issues GMHC determined that it would be less expensive to demolish <br />the existing structure and build a new home rather than try to extensively remodel the <br />home and add a new foundation and basement. GMHC offered to purchase the home <br />from the Wu’s. That offer was declined. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.