The Washington Trust for Historic Preservation has asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to force a redo on the Port of Everett’s efforts to save the Collins Building.
In a letter to the agency, field director Chris Moore cited a letter that he said shows that port officials were “
both aware of and complicit” in a strategy to raze the historic building.
The Collins Building, a former casket factory, is on the state and national historic registers as an example of factories that used to line Everett’s waterfront.
The Army Corps of Engineers allowed the port to create a new marina for large boats in the vicinity of the building, but said it could do so only if it worked with Historic Everett and other preservation groups in efforts to save it. A federal panel that advises the Corps recently said the port had done everything it needed to do to receive demolition approval. But the panel also suggests that the port consider holding off on razing the building.
Moore suggested that a letter written by Rockey Hill and Knowlton public relations to Maritime Trust, the port’s partner in a proposed $400 million redevelopment of the area, shows the port didn’t get preservations efforts a fair chance.
The letter said Maritime wanted to remove the building, minimize the time it took to do so and minimize negative reaction to the move. It then outlined some tactics to make those things happen.
If that indeed was the strategy, Moore said, then it was a conflict of interest for the port to enter into an agreement to “explore all alternatives for the viable redevelopment and rehabilitation of the Collins Building.”
Moore, in a letter to the Jonathan Smith of the Corps dated Oct. 29, asked that the agreement be nullified and the port be directed to start over. If that doesn’t happen, he’d like to see the issue be part of the dispute resolution process.
Bert Meers of Maritime Trust said the public relations firm was never hired and its proposal was never initiated.
The port’s John Mohr said that the port chose to enter into the agreement and to explore ways to find a private developer interested in saving the building without using public money.
Only one proposal came forward, and it failed to find financing.
Supporters of the building have said Maritime and the port grossly inflated the cost of refurbishing it in an effort to receive approval for its demolition.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
