Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The Albert Lea City Council on Monday voted to abate the former Broadway Theater building on South Broadway after years of deterioration. 

The action declares the building, at 338 S. Broadway, as hazardous and allows the city to move forward with getting bids for demolition. The city had worked with the property owners for about four years on other options for the building, and the property was placarded in December 2023. 

Building official Wayne Sorensen presented the council with concerns about the exterior of the building during the meeting, noting that the building is leaning and that there is a rod that goes throughout the entire building that appears to be holding up a wall, among several other concerns.

He estimated repairs would cost upwards of $700,000 just for exterior repairs needed to make the building stable. This does not include costs for the interior. 

“Every day it stands there, it makes me uncomfortable,” Sorensen said. 

The former Broadway Theater, built in 1902, spans almost 9,000 square feet at the corner of Broadway Avenue and College Street. 

City staff first started working with the current property owners in 2021 after inspectors noticed loose sandstone panels on the exterior of the south wall. At that time, the city barricaded the sidewalk along College Street to prevent pedestrians from being hit by falling debris above. The sidewalk remains barricaded today. 

Then in 2022 the city hired an engineering firm called SEH to help plan for the demolition of the adjacent building, which shared a wall with the former theater. The city also wanted to document the condition of the theater building before removing the adjacent building. 

That evaluation revealed structural problems in the theater building and the city paid for a follow-up evaluation in 2023. Staff shared the evaluations with the owners and met with them twice in attempts to identify solutions before placarding the building as hazardous in December 2023.  

City Attorney Joel Holstad, who described himself as an “old building guy,” and who rarely agrees with tearing buildings down, said in this case there was no question that something significant needed to be done — and fast  noting he thought the conversation about the removal actually should have taken place last year. 

“I started this conversation with Wayne trying to convince him that the building could be saved, but I no longer have that opinion,” Holstad said. “I’m actually very, very concerned every time I get the Tribune that I’m going to read that somebody died on the sidewalk. I legitimately believe that this is an actual threat of somebody, an Albert Lea resident, dying as a result of the failure of the building.”

He said he thought the documentation of the building condition was significant enough, though the abatement process is still flexible. He said the city is prepared to let the owners repair the building but is concluding it is not likely to be justified because of the cost. 

“This is a legal problem that outweighs the tragedy of losing a landmark building,” Holstad said. 

Sorensen said over the years there have been proposals for redevelopment of the property that did not come to fruition and he recommended the building be removed. 

He said if the owners go along with the demolition process, the removal will go quicker; otherwise, it has to go through the district court, which would add on three to four months. 

Third Ward Councilor Jason Howland said while he agreed with the removal of the building, he was concerned with voting on abating something they didn’t have a cost for and questioned why the council couldn’t wait two weeks until a more definite cost estimate was secured. 

“This isn’t a problem that just popped up,” he said. “We’ve known about this for quite some time. I think it’s disingenuous to say no, you have to do this, because in two weeks something might happen. We’ve known about this for quite some time.”

Fourth Ward Councilor Reid Olson said he thought city staff gave the council the proper insight it needed to make its decision and said he did not think it was fair for staff to waste their time and go out and get more specific estimates if they didn’t know what the council would ultimately decide. 

After some discussion, Sorensen said he estimated the removal would be between $250,000 to $300,000, not including the cost of asbestos removal. The city will ultimately put the demolition out for bids, and the project will have to come back to the council for approval because it will be over $100,000 and because it was not budgeted. 

Holstad advised against leaving the building standing without action for another couple weeks. 

City Manager Ian Rigg said the city has known the building is a hazard and that not taking action puts the city in a more serious situation. 

Second Ward Councilor Larry Baker said though he is a person who typically wants to save older buildings, he knows this building needs to come down. 

“The reality of it is, that building needs to go,” Baker said. 

He said he has driven past the building for years now and seen the bend worsen in the south wall.

He questioned if the city could be liable in the event something happened to someone because of the building and the city had not acted. 

“If we know the problem, but do nothing about the problem and someone dies, it’s a very serious problem,”  Holstad said. 

The councilors ultimately voted 6-0 to abate the property. Councilor Rachel Christensen was absent. 

The council also voted to move forward with the abatement of three residential structures at 809 W. Clark St., 915 Autumn St. and 819 Garfield Ave. 

The cost for the abatement of the homes will come from the city’s blight fund.