Keeping the mill is crucial to sparking a downtown renaissance

After attending recent public meetings about Bates Mill No. 5, I felt like John the Baptist crying in the wilderness, while the greater power feigned being deaf.

Residents from Lewiston and Auburn expressed their views to the Lewiston City Council, yet their opinions, though impassioned, educated, visionary, and reasoned, were ignored. I asked how culture and community were integrated into future plans for Mill No. 5, and didn’t receive satisfying answers. It’s heartbreaking.

As I walked out into the snow and ice after that meeting, I felt the council lacked vision. There will always be plenty of negatives to grouse about, and though structural and safety issues may decide the mill’s fate, if these concerns are small enough to save the structure from demolition, it should be saved.

It costs money to run a city, and residents want services. One service the council must provide is reflecting the desires of its citizens. Perhaps we need to hold a more public decision-making process on the mill, because it affects not only Lewiston, but Auburn as well. Perhaps we need a definitive sign from Auburn that there will be real support for the future of Mill No. 5.

Our cities are joined at the hip. But as more and more development occurs on the margins, there is less hope for a wellspring of an economy occurring downtown.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and usually the one with vision. Those who think Mill No.5 is ugly have no vision. Mill No. 5 is an asset, not an albatross, as development hucksters and the myopic would have you believe. As one elder Lewiston resident said at the recent meeting of the mill task force, “We have a lot of assets in the twin cities, and we need to count this mill as one of them.”

Indeed, the creative/business potential that high-ceilinged space provides is larger in scope than the council seems to envision. I believe if the mill is destroyed, the cities will have lost an important part of their past, and a possible creative and cultural future as well. I ask myself, what do we need as a culture in this area? What will draw people?

Something unique, like this mill.

Special events, orchestras, dance companies, theatre projects, art installations and studios are some possibilities, and there are green industries and new technologies that haven’t been considered. Some original thought would serve this community, but I don’t see anyone willing to open their mind to expanding how surrounding areas look at L-A.

Mill No. 5 is as much about public perception of the area, as it is about development. It is key for demonstrating how we can transform the past into a brilliant future.

At one meeting, I was informed that “open space” – even if it is empty blacktop, and without grass – is translated to “greenfield” in “developer/business speak.” Demolish Mill No. 5.and one might as well rename Lewiston “Greenfield” because that is what the heart of the city will be.

All the history that once existed there will be lost. All concepts for creative use of the space will have been turned to dust. Upon demolition, the space may be soulless and vacant for more than a decade, before a developer with enough clout to build a major development is found, if ever.

According to the task force, demolition carries a greater upfront cost than simply maintaining the mill. That’s right; after the final cost totals of both development and the demolition; status quo is the perhaps the least expensive option.

So if the government decides the demolition of a completely functional mill building is the path to choose, I say “shame on you.” We can make an economic impact without destroying this landmark, which can easily earn federal status as a historic building. Historic buildings receive federal support, tax credits, and can maximize the creative potential that currently sits untapped.

When the governor’s summit on the creative economy was held at the Bates Mill complex, it was meant to inspire the state, but it looks like the council’s hearts are hard, and their ears stuffed with cotton. The greatest service the council could do for the community is to provide access to the mill for those with a vision for it.

For more information on the creative economy, I recommend a new study by the New England Foundation for the Arts. It’s available at nefa.org/pubs/index.html.

The cities could provide start up infrastructure for a true downtown renaissance. Of the numerous architects that spoke on behalf of saving the structure, they all spoke of the need for visioning its use. I’m sure if this edict was taken seriously, many functional uses for the space can be found, some within our own community.

We are identified by the heartbeat of the downtown and its appearance, and need to think twice about demolition and re-use of the mill. Think how this decision will affect the area for seven generations. Think big, but think deeply.

There is a lot at stake here.

Leland Faulkner, of Auburn, is a film maker, performing artist, director, and former Maine Arts Commissioner. E-mail leland@ lelandfaulkner.com