MASON CITY – One home is demolished on East State Street and another will soon follow, to make way for a historic home from a flood zone.
On October 1st, the Mason City Council approved a resolution authorizing the execution of a relocation agreement between the City of Mason City and Community Betterment Mason City for the
historic William and Margaret Egloff House, Sauna and Garden House located at 655 7th Street NE.
According to the City, the Egloff House was built in 1938-1939 and was substantially damaged by flooding in June 2008. The City has sought to save the home and have it relocated ever since.
Community Betterment Mason City purchased the Egloff House from the City for $1. The house and garden house will be moved to the two lots located at 310 and 314 East State Street. The two properties located there are being demolished at this time. The sauna will be moved to 110 South Carolina Avenue. The structures must be moved by July 1, 2014. The sauna must be moved by December 31, 2013.
The City waived all permit fees for Community Betterment and will remove trees on 7th Street so the house can be moved.
As part of the agreement, Community Betterment must provide the public 52 hours of access per year to the public spaces in the house (one hour per week). A plaque memorializing the contribution of several agencies must be mounted in a visible location at the house.
Possibly somebody could help me with this question? This may sound strange but I actually found a book in my home that had 310 e. state street Mason city Iowa wrote inside the first page. Mind you, I am from Ohio. I just happen to come across this book with this address wrote inside. I am curious to how this book traveled to Ohio and I am currently researching to find out who this person was to write a name and this address inside the found book. I am wondering if anyone has any knowledge of this place? I am clueless where to look for answers but very determined to do so. How many rooms does this home have? Possibly she/he had a large family? Looking for answers and would appreciate any leads! Thank you.
I wonder who is paying for this new development, we need an answer, will it be the City or FEMA? http://www.masoncity.net/bidview.aspx?bid=523
The Asbestos has to be removed if the house is demolished or moved. The City will be reimbursed by FEMA for the cost.
Just wondering, is this property going to be taxed, (property tax) like other houses in the area. If not, then there goes two more properties off the tax roles in River City….
Doubt it since the community betterment is robin anderson’s … just wait till the city assessor comes by and gives you the bad news that your property is assessed 40% higher … they never need to raise the levy again, our saviors bookmeyer and council set that up we all got screwed
These two houses were condemned rentals that were part of the Hammond Estates debacle. They weren’t safe for human habitation and needed to come down.
What is/was the cost of two properties, their demolition, tree removal, and transport of the home to the new site? Where is that money coming from?
The article stated that the city waived all permit fees and removed trees so the house could be moved. To all the retards who said no tax money was spent, I suggest they reread the article, only a little closer this time. Also I wonder how many new businesses this house moving will bring to the city. My real question is-why? What is so special abut a house that it has to be saved like a precious jewel? Some people must be awful bored to have to do something like this to find an interest in their loser life. And what about the houses that were destroyed? Didn’t they have some history also?
When I was in my early teens I used to shovel the snow for Mrs. Egloff. The inside of the house is something special. It is worth the money spent cutting down trees to save it. I for one am looking forward to seeing it again. Will it bring good jobs to Mason City? No. But it may help bring in tourist money which will help other area businesses. And it doesn’t cost anything to waive permit fees.
@DR Dunn- Let me see if I can make this clear to someone who obviously is not quite a mental giant. You’re right. It doesn’t cost anything to waive fees. But since the fees are money that comes into the city coffers, by waiving them doesn’t cost anything, but it does mean that the money that would come in from the fees paid doesn’t come in. Therefore, income which would be generated is lost. So, since you are such a beneficent retard, why don’t you pay the waived fees, therefore not only making sure the city does not pay any money out, but also to ascertain that any potential income is not lost?
“waste of tax payers dollars”. The only dollars wasted were cutting down the tree. Money that never came in wouldn’t be wasted dollars.
Why don’t you crawl out from behind your anonymous name and then call me names or are you to afraid to have your name put to your words?
Your posts and name calling only goes to prove just how ignorant you are.
First, the “waste of tax payers dollars” was not my post, though I concur 100%. Second, I am glad you agree money was wasted cutting down the trees. It shows you have some grasp of reality, however little it is. Third, you’re right. Money that never came in wouldn’t be wasted dollars. But the money that could have come in, but didn’t, would have been used by the city in some way. Therefore, the money that could have come in , but didn’t, falls in the same category as money spent, but wasted on something non productive, so the potential money gain the city would have experienced was not received, ergo, it was as if wasted. Though I really doubt a mind as small as yours could fathom such paradoxical reasoning. And in closing, am I to understand if I need a building taken down, or trees removed from my land, the city will waive all fees for the building’s destruction and remove the trees gratis? What’s good for one should be good for all. See if you can compute that in your pea sized brain and come up with a logical answer. Logical-one that really makes sense.
I don’t think you could see or understand logic if it came up and bit you in the butt. There is very little point in trying to reason with a regressive such as yourself. Your brain can’t understand reason and logic. I misspoke when I said the only money wasted was cutting down the tree. I should have said the only money spent was cutting down the tree. I believe it was worth every dime the city spent cutting down the tree to help move the house. I would say the same thing about saving your house if it had any real significant historical value. If I miss quoted you I apologize. It is hard to know just which anonymous coward I am responding to.
Interesting post. (I did get a chuckle at the “anonymous coward” jab) Though I did notice you did not answer my question. If I need a building taken down, or trees removed from my land, the city would waive all fees for the buildings destruction and remove the trees gratis. Is that correct? After all, if they did it for one entity, there should be no reason they can’t do it for another. And your “significant historical value” phrase. Who determines that value? Was a city wide poll taken to ascertain that? And who decided to waive the fees and cut the trees down? Was it the taxpayers, or was it people we voted in who are supposed to watch how and on what our tax money is spent, or wasted? I eagerly await your response. (And please go easy on the nonsensical rambling. It does get boring after a time.)
@dr dunn-I see by your “no post” that you have finally acquiesced and snuck off with the proverbial tail between your legs. I fully understand. Even a scorpion, when cornered with no retreat, will sting itself. Don’t worry, you’ll get over it. Have a nice day.
I have a life to live and it isn’t tied to this web site. The short answer to your 1st question is no. Question 2: common sense and a little knowledge of the background of the house. Question 3: no. Question 4: the people that were elected and/or hired buy the city to make those decisions. Question 5: see answer to question 4.
@dr dunn- You said no to the city waiving the fees or removing the trees. Why is that? If they can do it for a special interest group, why can’t they do it for me? That is the answer I want. This is where your pea brain and pseudo-intellectual garbage seems to fall a tad short. Is this another one of those country club deals, similar to the Harley-Davidson fiasco? Where our city leaders {that’s a joke)schmooze over cocktails and scratch each others backs. There comes a time when you can’t wiggle out of the cesspool no matter how hard you try. But keep trying, it’s fun to see you squirm.
no squirming here. Again the truth is on my side. But I probably shouldn’t have said just no to question 1. Take your plans to move a historically relevant house to city hall and ask them to cut down a tree to help preserve it. I bet they would work with you on that.
This is getting more interesting all the time. First, you say you misspoke about the money being wasted in cutting down the tree. Now you say you shouldn’t have said no to my ques. 1. Hmmmm, beginning to really question your credibility. I’m starting to wonder if you’re on drugs or perhaps intoxicated. Regardless, when a person starts making this many errors in a dialogue, it shows his basic premise was shoddy to begin with, ergo, you are beginning to bore me. Good-bye.
There are a lot of locals who are very upset that the old Park 70 Theater was destroyed instead of being saved. At least this part of the city’s history is being restored.
Blame THAT on the owners at the time. They let it fall into total disrepair until part of the front brick collapsed into highway 65. The City then stepped in to make it safe.
@Reggie (red) didn’t part of the balcony fall too? Or was that the old Bandbox or Strand. All of them were in pretty bad shape at the end.
You forgot about the old court house, that’s truly a shame. They said that it was falling down and beyond repair, but that’s not what the wrecking ball said. I was young then and used to go there every week to see Mr. Hanson, what a grand building on the inside.
I agree. It was another beautiful piece of architecture.
Waste of my tax dollars…
What about the 100 million $$ we spent to vacation Obama and company this summer? We paid for that too. This is a drop in the hat……..just saying….
Obama went home to see his birthplace and we got socked for the bill. I forgot to mention that above but one can’t edit so………..
…also forgot to mention it was to Kenya……ring a bell?
Stay on topic please?
What amount of “tax dollars” are directed toward this effort?
Oh, for heaven’s sake, Ms. Moose. The man is an American citizen. We, as tax payers, foot the bill for all kinds of trips, sojourns, vacations for everyone in the government, not just the President.”Crindly” is right–we should stay on task–I’m glad they’re saving the Egloff house. She’s beautiful and historic. I hope we all get the chance to see inside once it has been settled in.
What part of your tax dollars? This is a group that bought the home from the city and are moving it based on donations and private funds. None of this is being done by the city? If you are going to try and rip something, have some faxes before you spout off because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about!
Anonymous You knowledge is only exceeded by your handle. There are no city tax dollars being spent. This is an example of local people rising up and rallying to save the house. .