4.1A HRSR 11-02-2015 DRAFT MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Workshop Housing and Redevelopment Minutes Page 2 September 29,2015 a program for that which is being administered by CMHP. She stated that they have received requests for commercial and industrial demolition assistance,but not for residential demo. Ms. Othoudt noted that there are HRA's in other cities that buy lots,demo and sell them. Ms. Eddy noted that in previous discussions,but the HRA indicated that they were not interested in being property owners. Ms. Othoudt stated that this program could be scrapped and the HRA could consider purchasing properties for demolition and resale. She stated that the HRA might have an opportunity to recoup some or all of their money. Commissioner Toth asked if city staff would have the capability to do the demo. Ms. Othoudt stated that she did not think so. Commissioner Toth stated he would have concerns with costs associated with demolition, such as asbestos and lead paint. Commissioner Chuba stated that he did not feel it would be that costly. Ms. Othoudt asked what the HRA would like to do. Discussion followed regarding forgivable loans versus just giving a grant. The thought was that if the loan was forgivable, the HRA would not get the money back anyway. With a grant,it would not matter if the owner kept the property or sold it,but the blight would be gone. Commissioner Kuester asked how many blighted residential properties are in the city. Ms. Othoudt stated that the building department indicated there were at least a dozen. She suggested that current target area for the program being administered by CMHP could be expanded and more money could be added. Discussion followed regarding the prospect of the HRA acquiring properties to demo and resell. Ms. Othoudt stated that it was her understanding that other cities acquire properties based on appraised value. She stated that the proposed program before them gives the property owners the opportunity to demo and build new. Ms. Eddy suggested that the program before the HRA could be adopted and see what the interest or need is. Ms. Othoudt stated the two options before the HRA are: 1. The HR purchases the property for market value,demos and resells 2. Property owners use the program to demo and rebuild,demo and sell the property. Ms. Othoudt stated that a new policy would need to be written in order for the HRA to acquire properties and demo them. Commissioner Kuester asked how an appraisal value for a site with an unsound structure compares to that same lot with the structure demolished. She stated that she felt the restore vacant lot would be more valuable, since the expense of demolition would no longer be a factor. Commissioner Chuba stated that some value is still given to a structure,no matter what condition, so a lot would likely be appraised higher with the structure still on it. Ms. Othoudt stated that there is state funding available for demolition that the HRA could apply for,but it would be a loan,not a grant. It was the consensus that the HRA would not gain anything by seeking a loan.