By Mark St.J. Couhig

Forks Forum Editor

The Forks City Council soon will make a number of important decisions on how best to replace the old Rainforest Arts Center.

That includes whether it should be replaced at all.

The venerable old RAC, as it was known, was built in 1925 as the International Order of Odd Fellows Hall. It burned to the ground in October 2012.

The old Olympic Pharmacy building next door also went up in flames.

Under the terms of the insurance policy, the city has two more years to replace the RAC. A third year could be added if the city shows it is making a good faith effort toward the task.

Two central questions remain: Should it be rebuilt? If so, where?

The council hasn’t yet spoken, but many Forks residents appear to favor rebuilding the facility on its former site. Mayor Bryon Monohon said that’s his personal preference, but quickly added that it’s not his decision to make. He said he wants to hear from the voters.

If the council chooses the old site, another important question remains: What should be done regarding the lot on which the old pharmacy sat?

The lot is owned by Alaska Financial Services, an Anchorage firm. It’s listed for sale by Forks Avenue Real Estate.

Paul Pagac, a broker with Forks Avenue, said the city has mentioned the possibility of purchasing the property, but no serious discussions have taken place.

City Attorney/Planner Rod Fleck echoed those comments. “The council has discussed the lot and the people’s expectation that the council will buy it, but hasn’t given any authority to staff to discuss the purchase.”

Monohon said the city is willing to build the new facility on the one lot it owns “if that’s our limitation.”

He said he personally would prefer to utilize both, saying that empty lots tend to stay empty. “I don’t want us to look like Aberdeen,” he said.

He repeated that it’s not his decision to make.

It’s up to the people, he said.

“With a project like this, there are two ways we can go about this. We can work and build community consensus and get as much community support as we can, or we can bull-in-the-china-shop it. I’m much more in favor of getting as much input and as much unanimity as possible.”

The lot is now priced at $74,500, approximately twice its assessed value, Pagac said. The disparity in price versus value may have delayed the city’s decision, he said.

Monohon said he was aware the lot is selling for more than its value on paper, but added that in the larger scheme of things, that won’t be the sticking point. “It’s $40,000 in a $2.7 million project,” he said.

The city is now working with a group of architecture students from the University of Washington who are sketching ideas for the new facility. Their ideas are based on public input received to date, including a preference for a multi-use facility that would provide retail space as well as rental gathering space.

Monohon said they didn’t direct the students to designing a facility for one lot. “We didn’t constrain them in any way.”

If the city purchases the second lot, “I believe it can be scaled.”

Monohon said they had heard some discussion regarding the purchase of the entire block, including the existing buildings. Fleck said the idea “showed up in the public process. But that wasn’t the majority of the folks.”

He said no official from the city has yet discussed the possibility.

Seeking input

Monohon joined the Chamber of Commerce members at their weekly luncheon, Wednesday, May 1, to solicit opinions.

He told the gathering that the city has four options and that the choice made will have an effect on the settlement sum provided by the insurance company. 1. Rebuild in place (city receives $2.7 million from insurance settlement), 2. Rebuild elsewhere, ($2.7 million), 3. Use insurance money to buy a different building. ($1.1 million), 4. Take the settlement in cash ($1.1 million).

Bill Sperry asked if the city could lengthen the time required to make a decision, calling the settlement a one-time golden opportunity for Forks.

Chamber secretary Pam Hunter later said another possibility had been raised that perhaps the city could build the facility with public and private money and later “sell off parts of the businesses generated by the building to attractive buyers.”

The idea, she said, is to “keep the city from being permanent landowners of the corner lot while allowing us to capture the moment to rebuild the center of downtown.”

Monohon and Fleck both indicated that the city council likely will take up the issue during its next meeting, which will be at 7:30 p.m., Monday, May 13, in the council conference room at 500 E. Division St. A public comment period is scheduled.

Reach Mark Couhig at mcouhig@soundpublishing.com.