NORWAY — The Planning Board voted Thursday to delay demolition of the former Advertiser Democrat building complex on Pike’s Hill Road for four months, two weeks after the property’s owners sought permission to tear it down immediately.
The condition of the complex came to public attention at a meeting Dec. 22, when Todd Truman, who owns it with Peter Smedberg, told the Select Board the structures were beyond repair, posed a severe fire risk and were plagued by squatting and crime.
The Select Board referred the matter to the Planning Board. At the board’s meeting Jan. 7, member Jeff Stuhr moved to issue a demolition permit, citing the extreme risk the property posed to the surrounding area.
“If that building catches fire, it could hit Café Nomad and head right down Main Street,” Stuhr said at the Jan. 7 meeting.
At the time, the Planning Board postponed a decision on the property’s fate for two weeks and scheduled a public hearing.
About 20 people attended Thursday’s hearing, with some supporting restoration of the complex and others arguing it is too far gone to be saved.
Scott Truman, brother of property co-owner Todd Truman, said he believed the complex could not be saved. He noted that efforts had been made to stabilize the property, but block pillars in the basement now holding it up are leaning sideways.
“It is one of the worst buildings I have ever been in. It is ready to collapse,” Scott Truman said. “Waiting four months doesn’t eliminate that danger. The danger is still there, and people need to understand that.”
Scott Berk, owner of Café Nomad and president of Norway Downtown, emerged as a voice for preserving the historic property, citing the need to follow town ordinances and the economic potential of restoration.
“The citizens of Norway passed a demolition delay ordinance around 2010, and they did it for a reason. They recognized the importance of our historic buildings, particularly those listed on the (National Register of Historic Places), to the economic well-being of downtown,” Berk said, citing the town’s history of downtown and historic revitalization.
“It’s really smart, good economic development. The fact that we’ve preserved our downtown to the extent that we have has made a huge difference for the last 20 years. It’s one of the primary reasons that Norway has held up statewide as an example of successful downtown revitalization.”
Not all residents at the hearing agreed. Some said the complex could be demolished and replaced with viable commercial space.
Mike Miller, who lives in Norway, cited the need to examine the actual economic feasibility of restoring the property.
“I look at that building and ask, ‘What’s the feasibility, really?'” Miller said. “How much money are we talking? It looks gutted. What’s the return on investment for these folks to do that. Nostalgia is great, but this building has had its lifespan and gone through some tough times. It’s time to turn the corner and look at what it could be.”
Berk argued that preserving an older property can sometimes be cheaper than building anew, once tax incentives and other funding opportunities are considered.
According to Berk, since the issue “popped up on the radar” a few weeks ago, more than 25 concerned residents have come together to seek an alternative to demolition. He said there has also been interest in purchasing the building complex from Truman and Smedberg.
“We have two serious developers interested in taking on a project like this,” Berk said. “We just need a little bit of time.”
During the meeting, Smedberg appeared open to selling the property.
“We will give you all a chance to come together and figure out something we can do,” he said. “You figure something out, come to our number.”
Though the owners appear willing to sell, several major unknowns remain, chief among them whether the dilapidated structures are too far gone to be saved.
Ben Troutman, a Norway resident, said the strength of the downtown area drew him to the town as a young person, and that exploring whether the property could be saved was important.
“I think that it would be a shame if the town decided not to follow their ordinance,” Troutman said. “The building has enough relevance and potential that is at least worth looking at and assessing properly to see whether or not it is safe.”
Berk also acknowledged the possibility that the property is too far gone to save.
“Our hope is to get some building preservation experts and engineers and architects with a lot of experience in there to take a look at it,” he said. “They might walk out of it, if we get in there next week or two weeks, and say, ‘This building is beyond repair.’”
In four months, if no agreement is reached on the purchase of the building complex or no final decision is made on its potential for restoration, the Planning Board will likely approve demolition as planned.
At the meeting, Planning Board Chairman Dennis Gray noted that the board could move forward with demolition at any time if conditions warrant it.
At the end of the meeting, Smedberg joked that by April, once a decision is made, the property will have changed hands and he will be out of future discussions.
“Hopefully, you won’t be talking to me,” he said.
