The University of Maine student newspaper since 1875
home
Wednesday, May 9, 10:51 a.m.
News

Trustees schedule demolition of 10 duplexes in University Park; renters told their leases will not be renewable

Devin Reilly, a single mother and University of Maine nursing student who lives in University Park, speaks with a Maine Campus reporter on Sunday evening at her home, which has been scheduled for demolition this summer.
Michael Shepherd
Devin Reilly, a single mother and University of Maine nursing student who lives in University Park, speaks with a Maine Campus reporter on Sunday evening at her home, which has been scheduled for demolition this summer.

Eleven families at the University of Maine’s University Park learned last week they’ll need new apartments come July.

“It was such a shock,” said Devin Reilly, current three-bedroom tenant at University Park.

On Jan. 23, the University of Maine System’s board of trustees approved the demolition of 10 outdated three-bedroom duplexes at the park, located off College Avenue in Old Town, as part of a more than $1.3 million renovation project.

University Park was constructed in the 1960s. Several renovations have taken place since, including heating system upgrades and siding and roof improvements.

“Those are 50-year-old apartments,” said Dan Sturrup, interim director of Auxiliary Services at UMaine. “They are pretty much past their useful lives.”

Residents of the three-bedroom apartments will not be able to renew leases when they end on June 30, which has left at least one frustrated.

“There’s nothing wrong with these places. These are the best of the best around here,” said Reilly, a 33-year-old nursing student and a single mother of two daughters, ages 7 and 12.

During a visit by The Maine Campus, Reilly’s apartment was well-kept but for boxes and household items near the front door, ready for a quick move. The kitchen shows its age, but the walls were a bright white,and floors weren’t cracked or beat up.

“They say that these are way too outdated to live in, and that blows my mind,” Reilly said.

And Reilly said the first time she found out about the demolition and renovations was Monday night, after the trustees meeting.

“I wish they would have given us some kind of warning,” she said. “I moved here from Howland. I never would have done it if I knew this.”

Due to the inconvenience, Sturrup said his office is assisting the 11 families affected by the renovations in order to make their move as easy as possible, including providing boxes and packing tape to residents who want it.

“I have asked them all to contact me to see what we can do for accommodations as the summer approaches,” he said.

Reilly said she only received 8 used boxes and some packing tape and doesn’t feel Sturrup and Auxiliary Services are committed to helping families relocate.

“To me, don’t say, ‘I’m going to work with you individually and am committed to helping you move,’ and then send me eight boxes and a half a roll of packing tape,’” Reilly said.

She also said she heard a rumor from a neighbor that Auxiliary Services is paying for certain moves.

“We are not renting a moving company,”  said Sturrup in response to Reilly’s suspicions. “We are using our own staff and our own trucks.

“One tenant asked if there was a way we could help them move, meaning possibly provide a truck and a driver. I said, ‘Absolutely,’” he added. “Certainly we will do everything we can within reason to assist these families.”

Mark Brunton, Non-Traditional Student Board secretary and student senator, said he doesn’t understand why the residents have to move out.

“I’m a nontraditional student, he said. I have a family. I see that as my constituency, and this looks to me like they are targeting this demographic.”

Brunton said the the General Student Senate’s Services Committee discussed the University Park issue in a Friday meeting. He also discussed plans to talk to Sturrup about it in an upcoming meeting and bring a resolution to the senate floor.

“I’m planning to probably introduce a resolution to encourage the administration to reconsider,” said Brunton, who learned about the demolitions from Reilly.

Brunton also said he doesn’t understand why current residents in the three-bedroom apartments can’t stay until they are done with school.

“Let them finish school, move out at the end and don’t rent out their apartment,” he said. “Retire [apartments] as they become available.”

According to a letter Sturrup sent to tenants, trustees allocated University Park $1.3 million for renovations, which would include new fire sprinklers and upgraded life safety devices.

The letter also said that ventilation systems would be renovated to include new exhaust fans and units will be upgraded to improve air quality. Other renovation projects, which have not been disclosed, will take place over the summer.

According to Sturrup, disruptions for those not forced to move as a result of the renovations will be minimal.

At the end of the semester, nine residents would have preferred to stay at University Park, according to Sturrup, who said the units don’t absolutely need to be torn down by July 1.

“I have already worked with four of them who just need a couple more months and we are able to accommodate that,” he said. “If they qualify for a two-bedroom, they can certainly downgrade to a two-bedroom.”

Housing Serviceswebsite says in order to qualify for a two-bedroom unit, tenants are allowed up to four people, at least one of whom must be a child. In a three-bedroom apartment, up to six people are allowed and two must be children.

“I hate moving my kids around,” Reilly said. “I never would have moved, never, if I had known that I wouldn’t be able to stay here till I graduated. I do all of this on my own.”

Reilly, who qualifies to move into a two-bedroom apartment, said she couldn’t live in one.

“My kids fight,” she said. “ I couldn’t live like that.”

She also explained that, since moving to University Park, many of the three-bedroom apartments have been left empty despite people wanting to move in.

“They say they aren’t vacant, but there have been all kinds of empty apartments around here,” Reilly said.

Reilly, who has terminated her lease, is moving out of University Park on Tuesday.

“I want to get it done and move on with my semester,” she said. “It’s not like they are kicking me out.”

Sturrup said the empty lots from the demolished units will be left empty for now.

“We will revisit University Park in about 15 years,” he said. “What we needed to do was downsize so we could afford to do all the work required.

“Our goal is to build a new University Park. We just can’t do it now.”

 

  • Anonymous

    Outdated means university authorities are tired of them for whatever reason.  Its fairly clear they are in good condition. In this case the university says my way is to take the highway.  Advanced demolition for  a new complex that can’t be built now certainly sounds like self serving BS.

  • Iwarren

    Sometimes one wonders about the real value of education.
    Can’t see a for-profit landlord behaving as the trustees are. A paying renter would not be evicted for no reason other than that a replacement building would be built fifteen years in the future. Most buildings have a reasonable expectation of being livable much, much longer than fifty years.
    Meanwhile UMO supporters, private and taxpayers, pay the additional expense of the demolition which could be used to actually educate students.
    This doesn’t make much sense, but then common sense seems to get educated right out of people these days.

  • Anonymous

    I am a UMO grad from 1978.  Even back then, the “Powers That Be” did exactly as they pleased in all regards.  My personal experience was being suspended for a semester instead of being put on probation because of two failing grades, despite probation being the normal and prescribed action. Never got a straight answer as to why, especially since I transferred in with a 4.0 average. 

    Althought tempted to not return, I couldn’t waste the time and effort already invested so I changed my major enough to not need those two technical courses and graduated.  I constantly get their propaganda mailings but will NEVER give them a dime.  They are self-serving, greedy bureaucrats who don’t care 2 cents about the student, except for how much money they can get out of you.

    It is ok for students to live off campus in 100 yr old houses unsafely converted into numerous apartments, but the University thinks 50 year old apartments should be demolished?  And then, not replace them for 15 years????  Oh, please…….

  • Anonymous

    These people are receiving 5 months notice……..what is all of the complaining about?

  • Anonymous

    I wonder where the money from all the savings will go? into someone’s paycheck?  I used to live at UPark and it makes no sense for them to tear down the only decent sized apartments.  If anything the management was terrible as 1/2 the apartments would be empty for months at a time.  They used to say, ‘I will put you on a waiting list and contact you if an apartment opens up.  After a tenant would vacate it would take them months to repaint and refinish the floors.  A job that should have taken a day or so.  The apartments are in good shape and are a far better deal than some of the housing around old town and orono, because cable, internet and local phone is included.  I see this as a  terrible waste of money as it makes no fiscal sense to tear down buildings that are only 50 years old.  What about the historic  buildings on campus, of which some are from 1860′s.  I hope those in charge rethink this decision.