PORT OF HOOD RIVER MEETING MINUTES
Expo Center Conference Room
6:00 P.M.
Present: Commissioners Sherry Bohn, Don Hosford, Bill Lyons, and Hoby Streich; Attorney Jerry Jaques; from staff, David Harlan, Mike Doke, Linda Shames, and Laurie Borton
Absent: Commissioner Fred Duckwall; from staff, Linda Hull
Media: RaeLynn Ricarte
President Don Hosford called the work session to order at 6:05 p.m.
1. Waterfront Planning/Zone: Executive Director David Harlan commented briefly on the September 30 special meeting introducing William Smith Properties, Inc. to City Council members and the public stating that the meeting was well received. Harlan then reported on his October 1 testimony before the City Planning Commission on the proposed Waterfront Zone. The Planning Commission will continue the public hearing process on October 15, which Harlan stated he would also attend. The Commission agreed that further discussions would be held to identify a prioritization list of zoning issues critical to the Port that would be presented to the City Council. A traffic impact analysis for the proposed waterfront rezone, prepared by Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was reviewed. The analysis addressed existing (2003) land use and transportation conditions, and trip generation estimates under the current zoning for the 2018 peak weekday and weekend periods, as well as intersection queuing conditions. Harlan stated that staff would be monitoring the funds budgeted for Waterfront professional services and the Commission would be advised if budget amendments would be required.
President Hosford closed the work session at 6:54 p.m., and called the regular session to order at 7:02 p.m.
1. INTRODUCTIONS: Audience members present at the opening of the regular session introduced themselves to the Commission and Port staff.
2. MODIFICATIONS, ADDITIONS TO AGENDA BY COMMISSIONERS: None.
3. UNSCHEDULED ITEMS FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC: Richard Lee, a Results Through Representative Government member, presented a copy of the letter their group sent to the Hood River City Council regarding the City Planning Commission hearing process.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Motion:
Move to approve the minutes of the
September 23, 2003 work/regular
session meeting, and the September
30, 2003 special meeting.
Move: Bohn
Second: Lyons
Vote: Aye: Bohn, Hosford, Lyons,
and Streich
Absent: Duckwall
MOTION CARRIED
5. REPORTS
a)
Executive Director:
§ Waterfront Planning Update:
Executive Director David Harlan
reported that he would be attending
the City Planning Commission's continued
hearing on the proposed Waterfront
Zone on October 15, as well as any
subsequent hearings scheduled by
the Planning Commission and City
Council. Anticipating tonight's
appointment of the Waterfront Technical
Advisory Committee by the Commission,
the first meeting is scheduled for
Tuesday, October 14. Harlan reported
that he would be meeting with Port
of Everett officials on October
30 for a discussion on the Maritime
Trust agreement. Harlan also reported
on the notification from Oregon
Housing and Community Services that
Community Incentive Funds would
not be available for the 2nd Street
project.
§ Waterfront Asset Management
Technical Advisory Committee (WAMTAC):
Harlan presented his recommendations
for selection to the ad hoc technical
advisory committee, which will work
with and assist Port staff and consultants
in moving forward on the waterfront
development. Harlan stated the 12-member
committee would also include three
alternates to help ensure there
is enough critical mass throughout
the life of the committee for it
to continue to do its work. Harlan
reported that 22 applications had
been received in response to the
public advertisement, but that not
all of the categories identified
were covered. Commissioner Lyons
recommended that other individuals
with special expertise or knowledge
be invited to participate on an
as-needed basis.
§ Bridge Redeck Update: Harlan
reported a pre-bid meeting is scheduled
for October 10, and that bids will
be opened on October 23.
§ Wasco Street Update: The
City's attorney is drafting an Intergovernmental
Agreement regarding the $141,412
in Immediate Opportunity Funds that
were approved by the Oregon Transportation
Commission, and Harlan reported
that a copy of the draft has not
been provided to the Port for review.
Harlan reported that an associated
agreement from the Oregon Department
of Transportation has not yet been
received, and that a special meeting
of the Commission may be called
when the documents are ready for
Port approval.
§ Community College Update:
Columbia Gorge Community College
is still showing an interest in
potential classroom space at the
Big 7 Building, but that daytime
parking issues remain to be resolved.
The College has requested a three
year lease, with a 30-day out option,
and a lease rate starting at 25
cents a square foot. There was Commission
discussion comparing the College
start-up to other incubator businesses
whose lease rates begin reasonably
low and by the third year would
be at market rate, which is currently
45 cents per square foot.
§ House Bill 2491: A copy of
Port Commission reporting requirements,
which directs annual statements
of economic interest be filed with
the Oregon Government Standards
and Practices Commission beginning
April 15, 2005, was provided to
the Commission.
§ Oregon Public Ports Association
(OPPA)/Oregon Ports Group (OPG):
Harlan reported the OPG is a subset
of OPPA, and that small Ports continue
to have funding issues relative
to lobbying efforts. Harlan stated
an effort is being made to stay
together as one group. On a related
issue, Harlan reported that House
Bill 2300, which is an Oregon Economic
and Community Development Department
(OECDD) housecleaning bill, may
require more travel time on his
schedule.
§ Needs and Issues: The Port's
list of prioritized projects has
been presented and the committee
will be meeting soon to prioritize
projects through the County and
the OECDD.
§ Port Committees Update: Harlan
reported the Airport Advisory Committee
would be meeting on October 8; WAMTAC
on October 14; and a Waterfront
Recreation Committee
meeting would be scheduled later
in the month. Harlan stated he would
like to move forward on establishing
the ad hoc Marina Planning Committee.
b) Other - Community Relations Committee: No report was given on the October 6 meeting.
Mike Doke, Economic Development and Marketing Assistant, reported the Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS) is currently operating in test mode, and that a frequency assignment from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) may take a few months. Information on the AWOS will be publicized as soon as the testing period is complete and the FCC frequency is known.
6.
ITEMS FROM WORK SESSION: No action
taken.
7. NEW BUSINESS:
a) Wasco Business Park Infrastructure-Intergovernmental Agreement: No action taken.
b) Waterfront Asset Management Technical Advisory Committee: The following appointments were recommended by Harlan: regular members Kathie Alley (representing retail, business, and a county perspective); Mike Benedict (government and land-use planning); Bill Fashing (economic development); Steve Gates (tourism/recreation, business, windsurfer, downtown perspective); John Gerstenberger (technology, county perspective); Tom McCullough (business, boating); Dick Nafsinger (media, historical, business); Carl Perron (transportation, engineering); Scott Reynier (government, city council, windsurfer); Chris Strader (manufacturing, retail, downtown perspective); Tom Stevenson (business, tourism/recreation, windsurfer); and Ken Woodrich (business, windsurfer). The three alternate committee members recommended by Harlan were Jon Davies (business, windsurfer); Richard Lee (business); and Linda Maddox (windsurfer, tourism/recreation).
Motion:
Move to approve the list of twelve
regular members, and three alternates,
as recommended by the Executive
Director, to the Waterfront Asset
Management Technical Advisory Committee,
and authorize staff to invite individuals
with special expertise or knowledge
on an as needed basis, and ensure
there is linkage of this Committee
to the Community Relations Committee.
Move: Lyons
Second: Streich
Vote: Aye: Bohn, Hosford, Lyons,
and Streich
Absent: Duckwall
MOTION CARRIED
c) Waterfront Area Map Data Base Proposal: The Commission reviewed a proposal from Richard Leonard to prepare mapped information for use in development and property management of the Waterfront area. Leonard's proposal covers land north of I-84 extending from the Hood River channel on the east to The Hook on the west. Harlan commented that all of the work product produced as a part of the mapping project would be Port-owned data.
Motion:
Move to authorize staff to enter
into a contract with Richard Leonard
to prepare a Waterfront mapping
database in paper and electronic
format in an amount not to exceed
$20,400.00.
Move: Bohn
Second: Streich
Vote: Aye: Bohn, Hosford, Lyons,
and Streich
Absent: Duckwall
MOTION CARRIED
d) Deferred Compensation Plan-Resolution No. 2003-04-3: Harlan and Accounting Manager Linda Shames explained that the 457(b) deferred compensation plan being offered to interested Port employees was not a shared contribution plan and that the Port would act solely as a conduit for the employee's tax-exempt, payroll deduction. The new plan would not replace an existing deferred compensation plan, which has not performed well and whose representation has been spotty. Harlan stated the new 457(b) plan being considered comes recommended by Special Districts Association of Oregon.
Motion:
Move to adopt Resolution No. 2003-04-3
establishing a 457(b) deferred compensation
plan for eligible employees and
authorize staff to enter into an
agreement with Penn Associates Incorporated.
Move: Lyons
Second: Bohn
Vote: Aye: Bohn, Hosford, Lyons,
and Streich
Absent: Duckwall
MOTION CARRIED
e) Approval of Accounts Payable: None.
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: None.
9. NEXT MEETING DATE: The next regular meeting of the Port of Hood River Commission will be held on November 4, 2003 at the Expo Center Conference Room.
President Hosford adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m.
October 21, 2003 Regular Meeting Canceled
Committee Minutes:
WATERFRONT ASSET MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - OCTOBER 14, 2003
Present: Members Kathie Alley, Mike Benedict, Bill Fashing, John Gerstenberger, Tom McCullough, Carl Perron, Tom Stevenson, Ken Woodrich, Scott Reynier, Chris Strader; Port Commissioner Sherry Bohn; Port staff David Harlan and Linda Hull; Architect-Planners Richard Leonard and Robert Ilosvay; Marney Smith and Erin Deggendorfer, William Smith Properties; Consultants Richard Hill and David Blum.
Absent: Members Steve Gates, Dick Nafsinger; Alternates Jon Davies, Richard Lee, and Linda Maddox
Public: Mark Worth
I. Introductions: David Blum
The dinner meeting began at 6:15 p.m. with introductions by members describing their background and interest in the project. David Blum stated there is no waterfront "plan" at this point and we need to focus on the future and not the past.
II. Adaptive Reuse: David Harlan, Richard Leonard
Dave Harlan discussed the importance of this committee to achieving success on the waterfront and that it's not a discussion of "what we want" but "what will work" for the community, for the Port, and for the developer as dictated by market and fiscal realities. The Port believes the waterfront cannot be separated from the larger economic context of Hood River. Returns on investment from mixed-use redevelopment of the waterfront can help job-creation projects throughout the county.
Harlan stated the Port and the City have been working over three years to craft a mixed-use zone and they share goals to boost the local tax base to help support local schools and services, to pay the cost of public improvements through urban renewal, and to provide the Port with an adequate return on investment that it can use to invest in other needed job-creation projects.
The Port does not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. The waterfront planning process that began in 1989 created master plans that lacked market research and flexibility to be successful. Mixed-use zoning allows for a flexible waterfront development. The approach this time around is to get a zone in place first, then a developer, then a master plan based on current market research.
Architect-Planner Richard Leonard stated the waterfront property is now an industrial park. The basic street and utility infrastructures are already in place. The Event Site and the Expo Center are new and different uses of an industrial site. This redevelopment needs to be within the financial capability of the developer and must also be what the market will support to be successful.
III. Development Concepts and Approaches: David Blum
David Blum asked the committee to take 15 minutes to list all businesses and uses that would be market supportable on the Hood River waterfront under the following categories: General Retail, Traveler Retail, Local Retail, Office, Residential, Industrial (Traditional), Industrial (Relevant), Recreation (Passive), Recreation (Active), Other. The committee could also list uses that were negative and/or not acceptable.
IV. (TAC) Goals and Objectives: David Blum
David Blum reviewed the following goals and objectives with the committee:
Moving
the Project Forward
§ Understanding how the development
process works for this project.
§ Evaluating the Port's opportunities
and constraints from the community's
perspective.
§ Evaluating the Developer's
opportunities and constraints from
the community's perspective.
§ How to establish project
milestones that work.
Providing
Technical Input
§ What does the committee have
to contribute to the technical understanding
of this project.
§ What technical resources
are there in the community that
the Port should utilize.
§ What technical resources
are there in the community that
the Developer should utilize.
§ What level of technical information
is appropriate and when in the development
process.
Assist
in the communication of the complexities
and challenges of the project to
the general public.
§ How can we create confidence
in the community regarding the Port
and this project.
§ Why has this project been
so difficult to implement.
§ What does the community expect
from the Port.
§ What does the community expect
from the Developer.
§ How can a successful project
help the community, Port and the
Developer.
Mr. Blum reiterated that this committee is part of the public process in formulating "a plan to plan." The main objective is to define the project and get a developer who can do it. At the next meeting (October 28) committee members will each be assigned a category relevant to their area of expertise to research and analyze for local market data.
V. Site Limitations and the Hierarchy of Needs: Harlan, Leonard
Dave Harlan said the property is currently zoned for industrial uses. A recent traffic study indicated that under the current zoning the one-way in and out road pattern would cause the interchange to fail by the year 2028.
Another problem at the site is the sterile fill soils which increases costs for landscaping and public amenities. The wastewater treatment plant odor is problematic and may affect property values. Mixed-use development is more expensive because complex building codes must be utilized.
Richard Leonard stated the infrastructure to serve the development is the framework for reuse of the property. He stated parking constraints would have an effect on the development as well as the connection to downtown.
Carl Perron asked about private land constraints to the development. Harlan explained the Port purchased the entrance property formerly owned by Bob Barman and that other acquisitions may be possible. The long-term leases by current tenants may be problematic in the future. Tom Stevenson asked if the roadways could be adjusted. Harlan stated yes, anything can be moved but the expense is a consideration. Mike Benedict asked if the waterfront development would add a third leg to the county's two main economic bases of agriculture and recreation to broaden this base. Harlan stated yes, that the mixed-use redevelopment adds in broader economic venues to the county.
VI. Review Concepts and Approaches: David Blum
General Retail: David Blum stated that an analysis of the demand and market dynamics (will it fit?) is key to what businesses would locate on the waterfront. A concern was to protect the current downtown character; Blum stated that design guidelines and zoning size limitations preserve the town character but does not discriminate. Big national name stores would find it physically undoable. Mr. Blum indicated, however, that DaKine is a national name that could possibly place a factory outlet store on the waterfront.
Traveler Retail: Tom Stevenson mentioned The Fruit Tree was a big draw from the freeway because people were looking for local fruit and products; Ken Woodrich mentioned the Seattle Pike Street as a good model for showcasing local products. Carl Perron mentioned that scalability is an important issue and that buildings should complement the Oak Street downtown core area. Mentioned again was the importance of transportation between the two areas, that people need to have a way to move around once they have parked the car. Fear of saturating the market was mentioned, but Blum stated the businesses are enhanced if done right.
Local Retail: Mr. Perron mentioned that the scale of local retail needs to match downtown. Sherry Bohn stated that parking for RVs and tour buses is a big problem for downtown. Ken Woodrich said the parking problem is seasonal now, but 24x7, year-round use might affect the number of cars.
Office: Office development has a different dynamic than retail and more development risk. Local office space is expensive but it's market driven. There is a documented need for more office space in Hood River. Tom Stevenson said his experience was that it was easier to rent office space than retail space.
Residential: Dave Harlan stated that housing has to be part of the equation for 24x7 activity and that it adds to the community feel of the waterfront. Richard Leonard added that parking for housing is less than parking for retail/commercial. How and where housing would fit in to the whole development is still unknown.
Industrial (Traditional): Dave Harlan explained the traditional industrial is manufacturing typically in large buildings (current zoning).
Industrial (Relevant): Relevant industrial is viewed as smaller, cleaner, storefront manufacturing in scale with the development and downtown. One example would be someone who makes boat oars in back of a storefront.
Recreation (Passive & Active): Reviewed list, self-explanatory.
Other: Reviewed list, self-explanatory.
VII. Agenda Items for Next Meeting:
David Blum
David Blum stated that on October 28 members will be asked to choose an area of local market research to be brought back to the December meeting. Scalability, transportation, parking and affordability are areas identified for further discussion. Minutes and agenda will be distributed by Port staff Linda Hull.
Next Meeting: October 28, 2003, 5:45 PM, Hood River County Library Downstairs Meeting Room, 502 State Street, Hood River
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
WATERFRONT ASSET MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - OCTOBER 28, 2003
Present: Members Kathie Alley, Mike Benedict, Bill Fashing, John Gerstenberger, Tom McCullough, Carl Perron, Ken Woodrich, Scott Reynier, Chris Strader, Dick Nafsinger, Steve Gates and Alternates Richard Lee and Jon Davies; Port Commissioners Hoby Streich and Sherry Bohn; Community Relations Committee Member Kathy Watson; Port staff David Harlan, Mike Doke and Linda Hull; Marney Smith and Erin Deggendorfer, William Smith Properties; Consultants Richard Hill and David Blum.
Absent: Member Tom Stevenson, Alternate Linda Maddox
Public: Maui Meyer, Matt Kosmata
I. Introductions: Erin Deggendorfer
The meeting began at 5:45 p.m. with self-introductions by those in attendance.
II. Review of 10-14-03 Meeting: David Blum
For the benefit of those who were unable to attend the initial meeting of October 14, David Blum reviewed the expectations of this working committee, stating that the Port and developer need the group's input and ideas on what will work in the Hood River community to understand the local issues and market, to ensure the project is economically and physically viable, and to ensure that the project gets built. The minutes of the previous meeting were reviewed.
The waterfront area map database is being currently being completed. Adaptive reuse of the waterfront property was reviewed, explaining that the property was originally industrial land. The reuse of the property is what redevelopment is all about and it has to be market driven or it won't happen. The Port and developer have yet to have a "deal" and the committee's input and information will be important to them. The committee will help "plan to plan" by building the base for a master plan. Smith Properties is a developer and developers risk money to make money.
Dave Harlan said the Port's Diamond Cannery Redevelopment Project was highlighted by the state at the Brownfield 2003 Conference he just attended as an excellent example of industrial redevelopment. Blum stated the Port has already demonstrated it can accomplish this type of public investment project. Many excellent ideas were forthcoming at the first meeting; Blum said it is important to understand the real estate development process as well as the constraints of the Port and developer. The committee will be providing technical input to understand why this has been so difficult to implement in the past. Part of that information needs to be identifying who needs to participate, what will work here now and 20 years from now, and how to assist the Port and developer in communicating with the community. Blum reiterated that this is a "plan to plan" and that a real master plan drawing is the last piece to be implemented in this process.
Harlan said the waterfront was filled and developed as industrial property and thus has broad streets, high utility capacity and other infrastructure that would be expensive to relocate; other constraints are its sterile soil and limited transportation access. Harlan mentioned that Smith has considered an auto bridge across the Hood River linking the two waterfront areas and providing another access way. It's a relatively small site to develop and public financing via an urban renewal district will be studied. The improvements to The Dalles' waterfront were done through urban renewal financing.
Harlan said the Port must balance the different interests and needs of its constituents to help boost the economy and the quality of life, while at the same time recognizing and reinforcing the success of the recreation/tourism industry. The Port is looking to have some return on the waterfront high-end development to help develop other sites away from the waterfront for non-tourism jobs.
The most important difference this time around in waterfront planning is that the current Port Commission will start with an approved mixed-use zone and will then work with the developer to implement a plan based on a rational market perspective.
III. Development Concepts and Approaches Issues from 10-14-03
Blum reviewed ideas from last meeting; Sherry Bohn mentioned that all weekend people were coming into her café asking where to buy local fruit and pumpkins downtown. Blum handed out a Shields Date Garden catalog cover from Indio, CA; they've been in business 80 years and pull in all kinds of travelers off the freeway to buy dates (www.shieldsdates.com). People need a reason to stop at your town-enlarged farmers market has potential.
Carl Perron brought up the connectivity subject between downtown and the waterfront stating it should complement, not compete but keep the same feel, the same human scale and streetscape, small blocks like downtown. Creativity is needed for transportation between the two, 2nd Street overpass needs something to attract someone to cross over to the other side; design can be incorporated into pedestrian line of sight from 2nd and Oak.
Blum stated residential on the waterfront property would be high-end and it would be in the interest of the Port financially to research residential, office, and commercial-retail. Smith is a known commercial developer. Harlan said manufacturing that draws to the site would be beneficial as well. We have to keep in mind that Goal 9 and LCDC are factors and the 5-acre industrial land inventoried on the waterfront now would have to stay or possibly be exchanged. But small sporting goods and recreation manufacturing could be built upon the branding that is already here in Hood River. Parks are an element of the proposed zone and Port and developer need to have balance between non-revenue producing properties for public use and revenue producing development. Development is necessary on this site to help provide these park/greenspace amenities.
Carl Perron felt the year-round issue is important; development of the area will help the seasonal-only activity of Hood River and may bring more extended stays into the area all year long, not just in the summer months. He also felt the adjacent private properties need to be considered in the proposed development.
Perron spoke to the Scalability issue, discussing the streetscape idea of keeping everything between downtown and the waterfront on the same human scale for complementing and connecting the two areas. You can't duplicate the historic look of downtown but the design guidelines can pay homage to it by setting smaller-scale buildings closer to walkways, small city blocks, 2-3 stories, pedestrian friendly, loops and walkability, natural materials, not metal, non-neon signage, sitting and watching places, etc.
Blum commented the downtown and waterfront are two different spheres, but having the developer in the room listening to the dialogue on the issues is a bonus and happening early in the process.
Blum told the committee that their research gathering is part art, part science. They need to extract information from any source, by talking to people, researching through the internet, reading articles, clipping photos of other places, any and all ideas of what would work (or not work) are important to study. We want to know the market reality of the project. The developer is to help the Port reach its goals for job creation and as well as producing revenue.
Harlan stated the land is very expensive in Hood River and not competitive with land elsewhere. For example, industrial sites in The Dalles are ¼ the cost of that in Hood River. The goal is to create enough return on this site to create a new industrial site without debt service so the land costs are not so expensive. Mixed-use development of the waterfront fits the Port's policy goals.
IV. Assign Study Areas: David Blum
General Retail: Dick Nafsinger
Traveler Retail: Tom Stevenson, Chris Strader
Local Retail: Steve Gates, Sherry Bohn
Office: Tom McCullough, Ken Woodrich
Residential: Jon Davies, Scott Reynier
Industrial (Traditional): Tom McCullough
Industrial (Relevant): Ken Woodrich, Bill Fashing
Recreation (Passive & Active): Jon Davies, Steve Gates, Tom Stevenson, Sherry Bohn
Agriculture: Mike Benedict, Bill Fashing, Scott Reynier
Design Concepts (Scalability, Transportation, Parking, Affordability): Carl Perron, Kathie Alley, John Gerstenberger, Richard Lee
Anything people find can be submitted to the Port (Linda Hull, porthr@gorge.net) at any time, in any form, via email, photos, copies, internet links, etc. Kathy Watson said many municipalities will share their studies on various topics if you ask them.
V. Agenda Items for Next Meeting: David Blum
David Blum stated that we are looking for the market point-of-view, that the financial model will be done later. Please bring back fresh ideas for Hood River and this property. We'll have 'show and tell' next meeting.
START WHERE YOU ARE
~~~~
DREAM LARGE
Next
Meeting: Thursday, December 11,
2003, 5:45 PM
Hood River County Library Downstairs
Meeting Room, 502 State Street,
Hood River
Meeting
adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - OCTOBER 16, 2003
Attending: Members Richard Clarke, Ed Drew, John Benton and Felix Tomlinson; Port Commissioner/Member Hoby Streich; FBO Anne Yannotti; and Port Staff Mike Doke. Guests: Greg Sandercock, Denny Kindig.
The committee agreed that Mike Doke should act as committee chair to run the Airport Advisory Committee meetings. The meeting was called to order at 7 a.m.
There was discussion regarding changing Ken Jernstedt Airfield's designation from a Design Group I airport to the larger Design Group II. A main concern was working with property owners southeast of the airport - changing to a Design Group II would mean identifying properties southeast of the airport for potential property acquisition; entire parcels would not have to be purchased, but sections of property abutting the airport may be needed. The current airport layout does not satisfy Design Group I standards because taxiways and properties southeast of the airport lie too close to Runway 25/7; they must be at least 225 feet from the runway's centerline to be compliant. Design Group II's standard of pushing the taxiway at least 240 feet from the runway's center would require even more space. It was noted that this area has a low priority for property acquisitions in the current draft Master Plan Update discussions. The Port is discussing property acquisitions west, north and east of the airport with property owners but has not approached any property owners southeast of the airport. Hoby Streich said the Port Commission must consider the needs of the entire community, including airport neighbors but also the general public. John Benton noted that airport activity needs to grow or the airport will die. Benton and Anne Yannotti mentioned that surrounding hills and the lack of available jet fuel constrict the types of aircraft that use the airport.
A Design Group II airport could help economic development, noted Denny Kindig, who is FBO at The Dalles Municipal Regional Airport, which sees use by larger corporate planes used by Cardinal Glass, Wal-Mart, Safeway and Les Schwab. The general public also uses this larger airport to arrive for major events like weddings, he added. Pilots from those planes have expressed they would rather land in Hood River. John Benton noted Ken Jernstedt Airport and The Dalles Municipal Regional Airport enjoy a symbiotic relationship.
Richard Clarke expressed a desire to keep the Design Group II status as a Master Plan Update goal. It is important to identify the properties southeast of the airport in the update to make them eligible for Federal Aviation Administration grant funds. Ed Drew said the update must have realistic projects that can be accomplished in the 20-year planning period. There was consensus to strive toward a Design Group II status.
Mike Doke said properties southeast of the airport can be identified for potential property acquisition and that the Port prefers to work with willing property sellers whenever possible. He noted Twin Peaks is identified in the current Master Plan Update for purchase but has not been acquired - simply listing a parcel for acquisition does not mean the Port would purchase it over the landowner's objection.
There was discussion about moving the current runway to the east. This would require abandoning or relocating Orchard Road, but it would add to safety since Runway 7 would shift further east from Highway 281 (Tucker Road). There was consensus to support this proposal. John Benton noted neighbors might not object to abandoning Orchard Road east of the airport because of a high incidence of speeding traffic (many motorists speed in this 45 mph zone to get past Highway 281 traffic). He said the land beyond the Runway 25 approach slopes toward the Hood River and relocating the road there did not make sense. He said Orchard Road should simply be abandoned. Felix Tomlinson noted a new route could be added by making improvements to Airport Drive south of Ken Jernstedt Airfield. After discussion, it was determined improving Airport Drive is an option, but the most efficient plan would be to simply rely on the existing Orchard Road access points from Highway 281. Orchard Road should be abandoned and dead-ended.
Moving the runway east could provide better airport access to landowners residing southeast of the airport, since the middle of the runway would move closer to those homes. This could help allow ingress-egress from this area, encouraging pilot activity in the neighborhood. Allowing ingress-egress may have a positive effect on these private properties, too, since airport access could add property value.
Anne Yannotti asked about moving the FBO building to the airport's north side. If property can be purchased from Terry Brandt, this area is well suited for hangar development, she noted. Transient plane traffic utilizes the north end, too, and require FBO services. The FBO can best cater to hangared and transient pilots by operating on the north side. She supported many of the elements identified in Layout Option B, offered by Planning Consultants David Miller and Aaron Faegre at the October 8 Airport Master Plan Update meetings. Aviation development could occur on the south side of the airport. There was consensus supporting an FBO move to the airport's north side, but John Benton stressed that development on the south end should not block access from Airport Drive.
Other items discussed but not resolved were moving Twin Peaks restaurant to the north (out of the runway approach) and recognizing the potential growth in helicopter activity.
The Airport Advisory Committee reached consensus on these points: Moving toward Design Group II designation; shifting Runway 25/7 east and abandoning the section of Orchard Road east of Runway 25; identifying properties west, north and east of the airport for acquisition; including the northern edge of property southeast of the airport for potential acquisition; and moving the FBO Building and associated operations to the airport's north end.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 a.m.
 |
 |
|
 Give your feedback on this article
|
||
 |
 |
