LEWISTON — As condemned buildings go, the structure at 10 College St. might not look as bad as it is.
"It would look a lot worse if I'd left it alone," neighbor Francis Gagnon said. "But I had to do something. It was hurting my property values, and my business."
Now the city is prepared to tear down the building once and for all. Gagnon can breathe a sigh of relief.
"I'll certainly have less to do," he said. "And maybe it will give the neighborhood a chance."
The six-unit apartment building has been vacant since 2008. According to city records, Deutsche Bank AG New York foreclosed and took over the property from Erwin May in April 2010 but has since done little with it.
Code Enforcement Officer Tom Maynard said the building was left vacant and unsecured for years, luring copper thieves and squatters. Neighbors began using the property as a dump. But the city had no luck contacting the bank.
Eventually, the city had to hire a New York firm to serve notice of the condemnation and demolition hearing at the company's headquarters on Wall Street in New York City.
But with nobody in charge of the building, Gagnon said it just got worse and worse.
"It looked like a big crack house, and people were really intimidated by having it there," Gagnon said.
He began mowing the lawn and taking trash on the lawn to the dump. When police inspected the building and assured him it was empty, he went in and locked windows and secured doors.
"Once I mowed the lawn, it looked like a pretty nice house," he said. "There was one busted window, and that was it. I took old doors that were inside and put them over the windows so people couldn't break in. Then, I boarded up the front door."
Jeff Baril, Lewiston's Code Enforcement officer, called Gagnon a good steward and neighbor.
"He's just trying to keep his family safe," Baril said. "He's just a few doors down, and there's very little space between the units. If a fire were to start there, it could move very quickly to his building."




10 COLLEGE
I talked to Mr. Gagnon before and he claim to be the owner. So i took him at his word, but to find he didn't owen it may have cost the city money. He claimed it would cost him $200,000.00 to repair the inside, but only $25,000 to take it down. It's no more a fire hazard then all those buildings in Little Canada, i don't see them coming down. So, go ahead and tear it down, because the money isn't coming out of his pocket like he claimed to me. The building has a good structure, but i never saw inside, as i took him at his word, but looking just from the outside the building it could have been saved with the effort by a real owner who cared about his builds and the tenants it could have housed...(just my opinion and not that of this paper)...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.