A state fire official says a burned out triplex in Nesquehoning, which has been the topic of discussion for several years, is so unsafe that it’s not even safe to burn it down in a controlled burn as a way to demolish it.

On Wednesday, borough councilwoman Abbie Guardiani provided an update on 1, 3 and 5 High St., which burned approximately six years ago and has sat unsecured and left to the elements and squatters ever since.

Guardiani said that council contacted the state fire officials recently and two officials toured the structure and said that the building was beyond doing a controlled burn to remove it, but said that it must come down for the safety of the neighbors and other residents.

Guardiani contacted Arro Engineers, which confirmed the state’s assessment, saying that it was so structurally unsafe that it needs to come down in an emergency demolition.

Two of the three properties are owned by a private resident from out of the area, but a court ruling in February by Carbon County Common Pleas Judge Steven Serfass allowed the borough to move forward on the demolition and place a lien on the property for the work. The third property in question, which is owned by another person, is in a settlement agreement between the borough and the owner.

Guardiani said that they met with the neighbor, who granted permission for the borough to come onto his property for the demolition.

The building has also been posted for demolition.

Once the paperwork is signed, the borough will then have 30 days for the demolition to be completed.

“It’s very dangerous,” Guardiani said. “It must come down. It’s going to cost all of us taxpayer dollars to take that down, but it must come down.”

The properties in question have sat vacant, with the exception of squatters who have been entering the unsecured buildings, since the structures burned.

However, the property owners have fought the borough over the matter of demolishing the buildings.

In the court ruling in February, the homeowner had 60 days to demolish or repair the structures, both of which never happened.

After the 60 days, the court said the borough has the right to move forward on the demolition of the buildings and put a lien on the property.