City weighs options after Nelson House receives no bids; staff may seek targeted repairs before sale

City planning staff on Monday told the commission that a publicly posted request-for-bids for the relocated Nelson House produced no offers and laid out three possible next steps: market the house through a realtor, amend the sale conditions to give buyers more flexibility, or complete limited, targeted repairs before offering the property again.

Jamie Pesch, planning staff liaison to the Historic District Commission, told the commission the city opened the bid period from about Sept. 10 to Nov. 21 and required site walk-throughs for prospective bidders. "Initial interest came from a number of parties," he said, "and ultimately, we did not receive any bids on the house by the bid period ending."

Why it matters: The Nelson House is a historic structure the city moved to a new site in summer 2024; the relocation and stabilization entailed public expense and the city prefers a private buyer to complete rehabilitation and reoccupancy. Staff said the current conditions of sale and tight timelines may have discouraged offers.

Options discussed 1) List with a realtor: Staff said listing with a broker and placing the property on MLS and consumer portals would broaden exposure. Pesch noted the city did not set a minimum bid price during the RFB process and suggested staff could instead establish a reserve or use a flat-fee arrangement with a broker. 2) Revise sale conditions: The existing purchase-and-redevelopment agreement required owner-occupancy, single-family use and a 12-month completion timeline, with short windows to begin exterior and interior work. Staff and commissioners said those constraints likely made financing and renovation timing prohibitively tight; staff suggested extending start or completion windows and permitting an accessory unit (for example, a secondary rental) to improve financing feasibility while preserving overall historic character. 3) City-funded targeted work before resale: Staff identified three candidate projects that could make the house more marketable without preempting future buyer plans: replace and structurally reinforce the roof; remove aluminum siding and re-side (acknowledging lead-paint considerations); and evaluate and repair the house's 42 wood windows on a case-by-case basis rather than wholesale replacement.

Funding and oversight Pesch said federal/state historic-preservation grants were possible if the house were listed on the National Register of Historic Places, but that process is lengthy and the house is not currently individually listed. He also noted that certain exterior work could be eligible expenses under a Brownfield plan and thus be reimbursable through tax increment financing if a brownfield project were later approved.

Commissioner responses and next steps Commissioners recommended a combined approach: several members favored listing with broader marketing plus revising timeline and occupancy conditions to be more flexible; some also supported limited city investment in high-priority stabilization work such as a reroof to protect the asset before sale. Commissioner Bill Kogel, who inspected the house, estimated substantial renovation costs and suggested staff obtain multiple market-comparable valuations before setting a listing or reserve price.

Staff said it will return with a recommended path forward and a formal plan for public distribution so the sale process is fair and transparent.

Ending: Pesch provided a contact for interested buyers and the commission asked staff to return with a written recommendation and proposed marketing or repair plan before any new sale activity.