The city will proceed with court action in the next six months if progress isn’t made on demolishing the front part of the Roanoke No. 2 mill on Jackson Street.

David King, who runs American Waste Systems and Interstate Storage, asked council at its meeting tonight to give him six months to see how he was progressing in his efforts.

Council, however, wanted their decision to have teeth in it and agreed to have City Attorney Gilbert Chichester petition the court requiring King to comply with the order to repair the building or have it demolished.

According to a memo contained in tonight’s agenda packet, the city has been working on the matter since June of 2010. The documentation shows that King, who told council he plans to demolish the portion of the building which fronts Jackson Street, has been working to have the building torn down.

As of February 13, however, the city determined repairs had not been made nor had the building been demolished.

“My intent is to demolish the building,” King told council.

King said the building is not a public safety threat because it is secured. “No one can enter it without the city’s authority. It’s totally secure.”

King said he believed the code the city is using in the matter was written for a house and not a commercial building. “It can not be torn down in a quick manner.”

King told council he has built a strong business from inside the mill, where he also maintains office space. He employs 44 people with a total payroll of $1.5 million.

Of the section he plans to demolish, he said, “It’s not a pleasant looking building … I have worked diligently to comply with this.”

M.J. Price is contracted to demolish the building and an asbestos survey has been done, King said. “The ordinance reads it needs to come down. It’s too expensive a process to do in one fell swoop.”

King said he has spent $94,000 on the property in the last six months. “I’m here to ask to continue the process another six months. I’m moving forward. I’m asking for more time to move forward.”

Said Councilwoman Suetta Scarbrough, however, “You’ve had three, 90-day extensions. I feel you’ve had enough time to do that.”

Replied King: “This started in June of 2010. I could not grow my business and then tear it down simultaneously … you can’t move any faster than I am moving. There are multiple steps that need to be followed before that bulldozer is fired up.”

He estimates it will cost anywhere from $150,000 to $450,000 to tear the building down, the biggest portion of costs being disposal.

“My concern is our responsibility,” Councilman Greg Lawson said. “These (the wording of the order) are pretty strong words … Due diligence is what I’m struggling with.”

Scarbrough moved to proceed with filing the court petition, but Councilman Carl Ferebee suggested adding the six months clause.

“Council has in the past allowed 90 days,” Chichester said. “Certainly you have that discretion.”

King said following the discussion he believed council’s decision was fair. He doesn’t use that portion of the building and said the portion he does use will be not affected.