Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heath board weighs demolition, rental and property‑management bids for 217 and 305 Lawrence
Summary
Board received competing proposals from three property managers and debated whether to rent, rehabilitate, or demolish two EDC‑owned houses (305 and 217 Lawrence). Members agreed to site visits and tabled the property‑management award pending refined bids and inspection.
The Heath EDC discussed a range of options Dec. 11 for two EDC‑owned properties — 305 Lawrence Drive (the larger, water‑damaged house sometimes described as the 'goat house') and 217 Lawrence Drive. Mr. Koepke summarized outreach to three property managers (Legacy/Stan Britton, Cox Premier Properties/Melissa Cox, and Kyle Properties/Ryan Kyle), describing differences in proposed fees, screening practices, reserves, and maintenance approaches.
Koepke said manager proposals produced a wide spectrum of cost and income estimates, with some managers forecasting that a significant investment (in the hundreds of thousands) could bring rents toward $10,000 for a high‑end rehab, while more conservative approaches would produce smaller rents and lower upfront costs. He cautioned that 305 Lawrence is “in awe of how bad the shape that property is in” and showed photos of water damage, rot, and other deferred maintenance.
Several board members argued that 305 may be a net liability to hold and favored demolition or removal of the structure to eliminate insurance and maintenance costs; one board member said demolition costs (two bids were on file) were a reasonable way to eliminate ongoing liabilities. Others favored pursuing a short‑term rental of 217 — which has a newer roof, AC and foundation repairs — but asked for a board visit to inspect conditions before committing to a property‑management contract.
Ultimately the board voted to table decisions on awarding property‑management contracts, instructed board members to visit 217 and 305 individually or as a posted meeting (no deliberation allowed during an unposted group visit), and asked staff to refine manager quotes (including clarifying reserves and septic demands) so the board can decide at a near‑term meeting.
