SACO — The future of the old Saco Fire Station has been put on hold once again, as city councilors Monday voted to put off a decision on sale, lease or demolition of the building. The vote was predicated, in part, by the receipt of a new offer that exceeds the city’s asking price.
Mayor-elect Mark Johnston came before the council to announce a verbal bid he had received Monday afternoon from Cynthia Taylor of Housing Initiatives of New England. Johnston said Taylor made a verbal offer of $475,000 for the Thornton Avenue building, which is $1,000 more than the city’s asking price for the property. She is proposing to use the building for an elderly housing project, he said.
“This is the best offer I’ve heard so far,” said Councilor Marston Lovell. “I think we can put this off for a week or whatever it takes.”
Mayor Roland “Ron” Michaud agreed, “if it’s for real, the council will be relieved,” as they have been putting off a decision while waiting for a better offer than those they had previously received.
Councilor Eric Cote was less enthusiastic: “I’m sure this woman will not offer $475,000 once she tours the place.”
The central fire station was vacated earlier this year when the fire department moved to a new building on North Street. The old fire station consists of two buildings: An office building and the fire garage, which was built in the 1930s. The former fire garage is eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The city council solicited proposals for the site and the property was listed with a commercial broker for six months. That listing has since expired.
Michaud said he initiated discussions with Saco Biddeford Savings Institution to discuss demolition of the building and use of the lot as parking. He defended his decision Monday to gather as much information as possible on all options for the lot. The bank, which is currently renting the parking spaces on the site, did not initiate the conversation, he said.
“This wasn’t some giant conspiracy,” said Michaud. “If we’re going to make a decision, we need all the facts.”
Bids for the demolition proposal were opened Nov. 9 and slated to be accepted Monday, but the council tabled acceptance of the bids.
Though the bid process has raised concern from members of the public who would like to see the building preserved, demolition is only one option for the site under consideration by the city.
Six proposals have been made for reuse of the building, and councilors voted Monday to discuss them in open session, rather than behind closed doors.
Among the other reuse proposals for the old fire station are: Lasko shoe manufacturing, which would use the building as a manufacturing site for high-end footwear; resident Katharine Tracy Scamman’s request for six months to develop a plan to use it as a videography studio; resident Tom Merrill’s letter urging against demolition and offering his help to repurpose the building; Saco Spirit’s request for six months to develop a plan to use it as a community space; and Nate Libby Masonry’s $40,000 offer to repurpose the building as office and garage space for the business.
“A lot of the ideas have not had numbers or business plans,” said Councilor Margaret Mills, who said she wants to sell the building but would like more written proposals.
Councilor Leslie Smith agreed, “I want to see a proposal with a dollar sign attached.”
Bill Mann, a consultant for Libby, addressed the council briefly at Cote’s request, noting that Libby has offered to restore the building and has followed the process for submitting bids.
“There is a great deal of structural work that needs to be done and the asking price is not reflective of the economic viability,” said Mann.
Mayor Michaud urged the council to make a decision before winter so the city can avoid the expense of heating the building.
The vote to table a decision until a written offer is received from Taylor, up to Jan. 1, 2012, was approved, 5-2.
— Kristen Schulze Muszynski can be contacted at 282-1535 Ext. 322 or kristenm@journaltribune.com. Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf contributed to this report.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less