The Old San Francisco Mint Building may be rescued from neglect!

NSAL, Washington

email

Articles:
San Francisco Examiner - Feb 4, 2000
Editorial

www.sfgate.com/
see article
"Not Mint Condition..."

The Associated Press, San Francisco
"Colony of rats stakes a claim on grounds of vacant museum.

Other buildings by A. B. Mullett threatened by GSA until local public support objected to unnecessary seismic plans and removal of public access:
Old Post Office in Portland, OR

Building by A. B. Mullett for which public funds were raised to help complete restoration after fire Private donations reached $201,000 by April 15, 2000. The North Wing restoration is complete and the wing has reopened to officers of the Treasury.
Treasury

Latest news on future of the Old Mint:

• Preserve the Old Mint's rich historic character;
• Provide for public use and access; and
• Create a focal point for and contribute to the economic and cultural vitality of the Mid-Market area.
  

• Organizational Structure: Briefly describe the organization(s) that may propose to undertake the rehabilitation and re-use of the Old Mint. If a team, please describe the background of each participating organization;
• Qualifications: Briefly describe any organizational experience with rehabilitation and re-use of historically significant buildings; and
• Potential Use: Describe the proposed use(s) for the Old Mint, and to the extent possible, describe how the use(s) would achive public use and access.
  

Background of the transfer of ownership:

The Old San Francisco Mint, lovingly referred to as the Granite Lady, withstood all of the major and minor earthquakes since its construction. It was the only building in San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake to have its own working water supply, saved the city from economic disaster, and aided in the extinguishing of fires following the earthquake. This was not a chance survival but survival by design. Historians for many years have credited Frank Lloyd Wright with the discovery of the floating building foundation which Wright used in the famed Imperial Hotel in Japan, but he took his idea from the survival of the San Francisco Mint designed by A. B. Mullett to withstand earthquakes, to provide its own water supply, and to last with honor and respect as the grandest building of Europe have for centuries.

Before disposing of the building people under the Clinton Administration in charge of this building under GSA, was quoted as calling it a building with no value! How can a National Treasure have no value? It can only fall into that category if people consider history, and democracy, valueless. Can we allow this to happen?

The first action by the Clinton administration to devalue this superior National Treasure was in 1994 when after the Treasury Department, under the recommendation of Philip Diehl, then the Director of the Mint, decided that just because the Mint survived all previous earthquakes in San Francisco, did not mean it would survive the next. So he ordered the popular museum closed even though it was visited constantly by tourists and school children, and transferred all of the offices from that building into temporary quarters for more than five years before they could find space for all of these workers. Then they transferred ownership of the building to GSA. At first we were pleased because in previous years GSA had shown great respect for National Treasures and under Reagan and Bush, had spent money to keep the roofing, guttering, and fascia stone work of these buildings in good condition so that there would be no deterioration and the buildings could be appreciated for all their beauty. They often raised money from private funding to accomplish these restorations. The Old Executive Office Building in Washington, DC is a prime example of work done most recently under the careful guidance of John Dawson, AIA, but started under the hands of John Rogers who also began the restoration process for the U.S. Treasury Building in Washington, DC.

The greatest crime under the Clinton Administration's guidance had been to consider any of the older buildings to be at risk in seismic activity because they do not use the newest technology (which has not been proven 100% successful). These people claim that all the old buildings are not safe and require $30 million dollars or more of modern reconstructive work to make them safe. The fact that these buildings have proven themselves safe in the worst earthquakes in two centuries does not convince them. So they allow the roofing and guttering to go unrepaired, they vacate buildings and leave them to rat infestations, so that self-destruction by neglect is inevitable. These buildings that will not fall by natural seismic activity from the bottom up are going to be left to natural destruction from leaking roof and gutter so that the water seeps into the stonework, destroying it slowly, and allowing rat infestation to insure further destruction of any parts not eaten by the storms. It costs much less to repair the roofing, guttering, and now the small amount of stonework than to use some modern theoretical seismic construction costing tens of millions of dollars on buildings that don't need it. Their absurd ignorance of construction of the Grand Granite Lady should not be allowed.

The public should know that the Treasury Department agreed that any final purchaser of the Granite Lady would have the promise of all the original chimneys restored. The cost of doing this work is substantially more than it would cost to repair the roof, gutters and minimal stonework damaged as of my visit last summer in July 1998. I saw the building inside. It was not being maintained, it was not being cleaned. It is simply sitting empty. GSA under Clinton was not to be trusted when it told news reporters that they were properly caring for the upkeep of the building.

This writer's sources say that rats have been a problem at the Mint even when it was occupied in the last years, so from the time of the Treasury Department's final occupation when Mr. Diehl was maligning it without cause, the rats were already a problem neglected by this administration. But at last there is a sale pending. The regulations of the sale include that no changes to inside or outside except restoration and preservation and usage needs can be made. The new proposed owners are the city and county of San Francisco. We learn the transfer of ownership will be delayed until San Francisco has a contractor lined up to make the repairs as GSA has outlined them. The GSA is including in their requirements new seismic upgrades, which the building does not need. We would like to see repairs to the gutters and downspouts soon but it appears GSA is making restoration a near impossibility. What GSA wants will destroy the building. GSA is planning similar disaster to the Old ST. Louis Post Office which is the only other remaining Mullett design using the floated foundation, though this was done not for earthquakes but for the fact the land was like quicksand. The instability was removed by floating the structure. There has not been any settling of the building in over 100 years.

The transfer of ownership was completed but the city now has offered the building to a company that been raising money to convert and renovate the building according to GSA requirements so that the building can be used as a museum. Contact the City of San Francisco, Mayor's office for current updates on the project and how you can support the on going renovation, restoration and conversion of use.