Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Condemnation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues public hearing on condemnation of 74 High Street; city attorney lays out demolition costs and Brownfields grant path
Summary
City attorney Kristen Collins read draft legislative findings saying the former Bradbury Nursing Home at 74 High Street is a dangerous building; the city estimates demolition and remediation at roughly $471,246 and would seek a Brownfields cleanup grant but must own the property; council continued the hearing to Oct. 1 to allow the owner to retain counsel.
Kristen Collins, the city attorney, told the Belfast City Council on Sept. 17 that the structure at 74 High Street — identified in council materials as the former Bradbury Nursing Home — has been adjudged a dangerous building and remains in substantial disrepair.
Collins read draft legislative findings that recounted the city’s prior dangerous-building proceedings, an incorporated court judgment dated June 26, 2024, and a professional remediation quote. She said an EnviroVantage estimate dated May 11, 2023 placed removal, cleanup and remediation at $455,270; adjusted for inflation through August 2024, the city now estimates the cost at $471,246. At the same time, the city’s most recent valuation shows the property is worth a little over $100,000, leaving the parcel “upside down” relative to demolition expense. Collins said, because the city lacks appropriated funds to remove and dispose of hazardous materials, the only reasonable route to secure cleanup funding is to acquire title and pursue a Brownfields cleanup grant.
Collins described the statutory and court basis for the proposed condemnation, citing the City of Belfast property maintenance code, the Belfast District Court docket number WALDCDashCVDash2021Dash014, and 17 M.R.S. § 2851 (dangerous building authority) in the drafted findings. She also said the notice of intent to take had been served to the owner, 74 High Street LLC, and to its principal, James Constable, and that Mr. Constable informed staff he had not yet retained counsel.
Because the owner was not present in person or on Zoom, Collins recommended taking public comment, reading the draft findings into the record and then continuing the public hearing so the owner could secure legal representation. After no members of the public indicated they wished to speak on the matter, Councilor [name withheld per transcript mapping] moved to continue the hearing to the council’s next meeting; the motion was seconded and the council voted to continue the public hearing to Oct. 1.
What it means: The continuation preserves the city’s ability to proceed while allowing additional process time for the property owner to respond and consult counsel. If the council ultimately finds a public exigency and proceeds, the city says it would acquire title to pursue grant funds to cover demolition and hazardous-material remediation rather than using taxpayer funds directly.
The next step: The council will reconvene the public hearing on Oct. 1 to receive further comment, consider any appearance by the property owner or their attorney, and decide whether to adopt an order of condemnation or take another course.
"To obtain those funds, we need to own the property," Collins said in explaining the rationale for a taking as drafted in the council packet.
