Work on $9M Olympia warehouse could start early next year, port official says
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- The Port of Olympia may seek bids in early 2027 to build a 70,000-square-foot warehouse.
- Projected cost for the second warehouse rose from about $4 million to over $9 million.
- Commissioners voted 3-2 to apply for an $11.25 million federal grant.
Work on a second marine terminal warehouse, which was approved by a previous Port of Olympia commission in 2024, could begin next year, a port official told The Olympian this week.
The port could begin seeking bids for the roughly 70,000-square-foot structure, which would be built alongside the existing warehouse, in early 2027, said James Sommer, the port’s public works program manager.
The need for a second warehouse, port officials have previously said, has been driven by a Brazil-based business called Suzano that already ships bulk paper products through the port.
But the additional space also could be used by other customers, Sommer said.
“It’s a clear span structure,” he said about the building, “so it essentially has no beams in the middle; it’s just kind of an arch shape and wide open on the inside, and it’s designed such that we can really put any cargo there ... it’s pretty versatile, and it’s got a nice thick slab in it, so structurally it can hold heavy, heavy loads, or paper pulp.”
The cost of the second warehouse, though, has risen sharply from a previous estimate of around $4 million. Now, the cost is north of $9 million, he said.
“We have about four and a half million dollars just in concrete work to put up the structure,” Sommer explained. “The structure itself is about $2 million installed, so unfortunately a lot of the site work and storm water requirements have driven up the cost pretty significantly.”
The question of how the port is going to pay for the warehouse and some marine terminal berth dredging was the focal point of a May 26 commission meeting in which the five commissioners voted 3-2 to authorize a federal grant application that could secure $11.25 million. Combine that with a port match of $6.5 million, and the port would have roughly $17 million to work with for the warehouse and dredging.
Port Executive Director Alex Smith explained the dredging request.
“The dock area at the marine terminal needs some dredging,” she told the commission. “Multi-year surveys show that there’s ongoing shoaling and sediment accumulation along the berth at both ends.”
Marine terminal senior manager Afsin Yilmaz added that it’s not an emergent need, but an emergent opportunity to secure the grant.
“The accumulation from under the dock on the north side, and some minor accumulation on the south side near the tugs might stop us from being able to accommodate two ships at the same time,” he said.
The cost to remove about 24,000 cubic yards of sediment is around $8 million. The sediment would be tested because of legacy contamination in Budd Inlet, said Shawn Gilbertson, the port’s director of environmental planning and programs.
“The assumption is that there is going to be some contamination in there,” he said. “We’ll find out how concentrated it is at the time of testing, but the plan is to remove it all to a landfill at this point.”
Commissioners react
Voting in favor of the grant were commissioners Jasmine Vasavada, Joel Hansen and Sarah Montano; voting against were commissioners Krag Unsoeld and Jerry Toompas.
Some of their thoughts:
- Unsoeld: “I’m in favor of the money for dredging, but I’m against lumping it in with the warehouse, because that’s making a commitment to developing the marine terminal in ways that I am not comfortable.”
- Toompas: “I don’t like having this short period of time to make this decision, and I think this is the most important decision we’ve made as a commission this year,” he said. “Currently, we have two major users of the port’s (marine terminal). It’s far below capacity already, and I’m just worried about spending $9.7 million for a (warehouse) project that was originally described as $4 million.”
- Vasavada: “I appreciate the efforts of staff to be nimble running a business like a private sector business,” she said. “I think the port is not yet running on all four cylinders when it comes to achieving the full level of communications that we’d like in order for everyone to understand where we get to decisions.”
Vasavada also reflected on the dilemma that surrounds decisions tied to the marine terminal, particularly as it relates to the future of it at the port. Over the years, critics of the port have frequently attacked the terminal over its questionable value to the port.
“The reason this isn’t a no-brainer is that fundamentally this commission has not made a decision that says we support continued operation of the marine terminal for the next 20 years, and so what I am struggling with is I believe that what we need is like a 10-year capital plan and other strategic plans where we are reaffirming what direction we’re going in,” she said.
She asked marine terminal senior manager Yilmaz if he has such a plan.
He didn’t answer that question directly, but he did defend the marine terminal operations.
“This marine terminal has a running cost, and when you have an entity in your hand that has a major running cost, you cannot just shut the door on it, you know, in a day, and then OK, just reduce the cost to zero,” he said. “... It’s our responsibility to the taxpayer to run that terminal to the best of its ability, so that it doesn’t lose value in infrastructure, and it doesn’t lose value in business, and cost the port more money.
“It’s not an item we can just leave, you know, hibernating; it will cost the port a lot of money, so dredging is part of it, to continue a business warehouse is part of it,” he said.
The due date for the grant application was June 1. The port expects to have an answer on the grant in September, public works project manager Sommer said.
