From Stark
Some of the people who still hope to save the waterfront Granary Building will be at this afternoon’s Port of Bellingham commission meeting, hoping to convince commissioners to give the 1928 waterfront structure one more chance at a new life.
The Granary Building was built in 1928 as the focal point of a once-booming egg and poultry business in Whatcom County. It has been vacant for decades, and was the property of Georgia-Pacific Corp. before that company shut down its waterfront pulp and paper operations and handed over its 137 acres of industrial land to the port in 2005.
Since that time, port officials have argued that the building is not salvageable. They say seawater seeps into its basement at high tide. In May 2012, Port Environmental Director Mike Stoner told Bellingham City Council that it would cost $14 million to make the building usable again, amounting to $533 per square foot.
Former Mayor Dan Pike and his staff favored preservation of the Granary and other old waterfront structures if possible, but current Mayor Kelli Linville and her staff now seem to agree that the Granary must go, partly because it would block the best route for street access to a redeveloped waterfront.
Developer John Blethen is not convinced.
Blethen, who has been involved in waterfront issues for years as a member of the Waterfront Futures Group, Waterfront Advisory Group, and unsuccessful port commission candidate, agrees that the $14 million price tag for a Granary rehab is a deal breaker if it is accurate. Blethen wants the port to give independent experts and would-be investors more access to the building to see if they agree that the cost would be that high.
Then, investors and developers could come to the port with their plans for reusing the building.
“The port needs to decide that they will at least explore saving this building,” Blethen said. “They could do a request for proposals before they knock the building down.”
Blethen said he and others expect to raise the issue during the public comment period at the start of the 3 p.m. Tuesday, July 17 commission meeting at Harbor Center, 1801 Roeder Ave. Commissioners are also scheduled to get an update on the building from port staff.
Blethen noted that earlier cost estimates for a Granary rehab were about $6 million, and he thinks the job would be feasible in that range. But he also said he’s not in a position to undertake the project himself.
Really? Kelli is willing to find the money to pay for a “quiet zone” that’s not really a quiet zone because of the whole BNSF double- triple-tracking issue, but we can’t find the money to save what should be an historic landmark? Really?
It is an old moldy building. Let it go, not worth 6million let alone 14 million. You know these projects never come in cheap when the final tally is done.
14 mil is just a drop in the bucket when you are loaded and we all know government estimates of costs are always less than the actual cost!
Cost overruns and government; never the twain shall ever meet, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
…hey, it’s only our tax dollars, right? THe City can buy the 100 acre wood without no clearly defined way to pay for it, why not fork over another $14mill of our property tax dough to refurbish this white elephant…
..tear the thing down, rip up the asphault and turn the whole darn place into a community truck farm until this City and community gets it’s collective act together and decides on what to do with the property. (of course, the City; the activist obstructionists; and Port all in agreement will happen when pigs fly)…
I don’t think a storage building for chicken feed counts as an historic landmark. The building doesn’t represent anything positive architecturally or culturally, but at least it is poorly positioned, ugly, and impedes a view backward to the old courthouse and the view forward to the bay. Not only would it cost excessively to turn it into a usable building, but the buildings around it would be compromised to accommodate it.
I think the best route into the old GP property would be well east of the granary building. Reason why is that route wouldn’t have to cross Chestnut Street. There is already an overpass.
At the granary building location, I think the overpass would be too low.
East of the granary. the road wouldn’t have to go through where the granary is. Access roads could be built on both sides of the building. West of granary from Chestnut, but the great thing about east of granary is the already existing overpass of Chestnut which could really be a benefit for pedestrians. One less street crossing.
I think it’s one of the more historic buildings in Bellingham – along with the territorial courthouse. That said, if it doesn’t make any sense to keep it, and nobody is coughing up the money, I think it’ll probably come down.
I’ve seen grainerys revamped into nice shopping spaces. However, this is one darn ugly building, it’s in a terrible location where it will block the view of the area, and I don’t know how you make this building fit into the ambiance of the newly developed area. Then there is the cost of making it safe and desirable.
I love old buildings, but this one needs to go.
The sister building in Sequim is in a redeveloped area and looks pretty good – it’s a mexican restaurant on the bottom.