LEWISTON — One big thing has not changed regarding Bates Mill No. 5, according to City Councilor Mike Lachance: It’s still a very big building, and it’s still in very bad shape.
“Is it going to make a bit of difference at the end of the day, what they do?” Lachance said. “In my opinion, I don’t believe it will. If it works out, great. But I don’t believe it will.”
Lachance voted against extending the option on Bates Mill No. 5 at Tuesday’s Lewiston City Council meeting. That option gave developer Tom Platz and the members of Grow L+A another year to secure tenants and come forward with a final plan to redevelop the massive structure.
City Administrator Ed Barrett said he gets the sense that Lewiston councilors are almost finished dealing with the mill building and are ready to see it demolished once and for all.
Lachance, who was the sole no vote on extending the option, said he already is.
“Basically, they keep coming back and we say this is the last chance,” Lachance said. “And then we get it back again and now this is the last chance. And then it comes back a third time and now this is the last chance. And I’m just getting frustrated hearing that again and again.”
Councilors have advanced plans to demolish the building two times before, in March 2010 and again in April 2012. Both times they stayed the demolitions, giving developers more time to come up with a way to save the structure. In 2010, it was a group hoping to put a casino in Lewiston. In 2012, it was Grow L+A.
Councilors have extended Grow L+A’s option twice since approving the first stay in 2012.
Lachance said he’s seen the proposals Platz — who’s been involved in the project for little over a year — and Grow L+A have made, most in executive sessions with the rest of the Lewiston council. They are impressive plans, he said.
“It’s been an evolving plan depending on who they are talking to at any time,” Lachance said. “He is putting a massive effort forward, and I won’t say he isn’t.”
He pointed to the city’s 2012 Riverfront Island Master Plan as the best authority. That plan reviewed all of the potential uses for the property, including renovating and reusing the entire structure, using part of it and tearing it down and putting something new up.
That’s still the best idea, Lachance said.
“The land under that building is what’s prime,” Lachance said.
He doesn’t see a market for another massive building but would rather see more mixed uses.
“A mix of park space with some civic uses, some retail — a little bit of everything,” he said. “Treat that land as a real commodity that can be used in a lot of different ways. Don’t just look for the ingredients that fit the mold we are stuck with now.”
Send questions/comments to the editors.
