City getting bids on cost for removal

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, April 4, 2007

Sarah Light, staff writer

The owner of the former Midwest Antiques building on West College Street has signed the paperwork granting permission to the city of Albert Lea to remove the building, which was placarded in December.

Now, the city is in the process of getting informal bids on what the demolition of the building on 117 W. College St. might cost, said Paul Stieler, Albert Lea fire chief and building inspector. Once that information is gained, then the city will decide how to move forward.

Email newsletter signup

Stieler said during the past few days the estimated cost for the removal of the building has increased because the city has found out how difficult it will be to tear down a structure that has shared walls with other businesses.

&8220;At this point, we don&8217;t know what needs to be done,&8221; Stieler said. &8220;If we tear it down, what&8217;s our responsibility of what needs to be done? We&8217;re still trying to determine what that is.&8221;

The decision from owner Judy McKinnon to grant the city the permission to move forward with its order for removal and access it back to her through taxes took place at the end of last week after the Albert Lea City Council March 26 meeting. There the council voted to give her a 10-day period to either come up with a plan of repair for the building or give permission to the city to demolish the building.

Prior to the meeting, a large part of the rear wall and foundation of the building had begun falling in, causing bricks to fall into the alleyway. A temporary fix was completed to solve the immediate safety hazard, but a more permanent decision still needed to be made.

Now that McKinnon has made her decision, Stieler said he would like to have all the bids and any other additional information to present to the council at its preagenda meeting Thursday evening so that the city can start moving toward that permanent decision.

If the council decides the cost is too high, then he doesn&8217;t know what will happen next, he said.

&8220;I have no idea. We&8217;ll cross that when we get there,&8221; he said.

City Attorney Steve Schwab said the original estimate to demolish the building was less than $50,000; now the estimate is in excess of $100,000 because of the shared walls.

&8220;If the cost is going to go up drastically, the city has to decide whether they&8217;re going to proceed,&8221; Schwab said.

While she did sign the order for removal, McKinnon, said she would still be interested in restoring the building if she were able to get an offer.

&8220;I think if there were any offers on the building, I could work with the city,&8221; she said. &8220;I think we all have the same goal in mind &8212; we want to improve the downtown. We want to attract viable business downtown. I don&8217;t feel that the city is my enemy. I don&8217;t think they think I&8217;m their enemy.&8221;

Discussion about the building began in 1992, when the Albert Lea Building Inspection Department inspected the building and came up with an extensive list of improvements that needed to be made to bring the building up to code.

At that point the inspection reported stated that electrical upgrading was necessary, extensive roof repair was needed and extensive brick facing was in need of repair.

Heating appliances had been disconnected and removed, the main level hardwood floor had been warped and heaved and several areas of exposed wood had rotted.

At that time McKinnon did not own the property; she became owner in 2000.

On Oct. 18, 2005, McKinnon received a letter from the city&8217;s inspection department that showed many violations including a leaking roof, deteriorating bricks, deteriorating mortar joints and missing bricks. The letter stated that she would have until Nov. 7, 2005 to comply with the order.

More than a year later, on Dec. 12, 2006, the building was placarded, or deemed unsafe for habitation, and McKinnon was given until Dec. 26 to present a timeline of completion dates to the city. If a timeline wasn&8217;t received, the city would move forward with the condemnation process.