Vacant Forest Hills building receives no bids
A vacant office building that Giant Eagle Inc. wanted as a site for a gas station received no bidders at a sheriff's sale this week, so the mortgage holder took the foreclosed property, a lawyer said.
Verona-based Engineered Products Inc. likely will sell the building, but first it would have to pay about $30,000 in property taxes owed to the county, Woodland Hills School District and Forest Hills, said James Chiafullo, EPI's lawyer.
Armore-Cascade Inc. of Imperial had owned the building, which is 102 years old, at 1844 Ardmore Blvd.
In June, EPI foreclosed on a 2010 mortgage that Ardmore-Cascade used to secure a debt it owed to EPI for the cost of building repairs EPI made while a tenant.
Ardmore-Cascade's filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection on Aug. 29 could have delayed the sheriff's sale on Monday, but a judge dismissed the filing in October for failure to file documents.
Since there were no bidders this week, EPI acquired the property for about $230,000, plus fees, which equals the company's costs and expenses for the mortgage, Chiafullo said.
The building is beside Forest Hills Presbyterian Church, which Giant Eagle approached, seeking to buy part of its parking lot for a GetGo convenience/gas station. But the church's membership failed to get enough votes to approve the sale in August, said the Rev. Ben Black, pastor.
Giant Eagle now has no plans for a GetGo in Forest Hills, company spokesman Dick Roberts said.
Tory Parrish a reporter for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-380-5662 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.