Yesterday in Part Four, I mentioned my concerns about the proposal presented to the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday morning. Basically, four questions:
1. What will the proposed capital investment in new water lines and fire hydrants, for private airplane hanger owners along the Bravo taxiway, cost?
2. Who will be expected to pay for it?
3. Why is Airport Manager Chris Torres recommending the construction of additional hangers along the Bravo taxiway, when previous planning documents showed the hanger expansion taking place on the opposite (north) side of the main runway, near the FBO?
4. Why does it appear that hangers are being built in violation of County Land Use Regulations and the International Building Code?
Anyone who builds a new home or commercial building in Archuleta County is expected to pay the cost of running their own water and sewer lines. Are the airplane hanger owners now going to have their improvements funded by the taxpayers?
I understand that this is America, and our wealthier citizens and corporations are often provided with federal tax credits and subsidies of various types. Perhaps that mentality filters down to our local government leaders, because wealthy residents help make Pagosa appear more vibrant and attractive. More “successful”.
I had the privilege, yesterday, of sitting down with Pam Flowers yesterday — director of the County Development Services Department — and separately, with Archuleta County Commissioner Warren Brown, to touch on the above questions.
Ms. Flowers noted that previous County administrations had not required airplane hangers to go through the same building approval process — submission of plans, inspections, payment of fees — that all other buildings in Archuleta County are required to go through. The justification, apparently, was that the Stevens Field Airport is County owned, so (for whatever reason) the private hangers built on leased County property could therefore be excused from meeting building codes and fire codes.
Unfortunately, this approach resulted in 50 structures without proper fire protection. The lack of sufficient fire hydrants and water pressure has now put the County in an awkward position as described by local realtor Jace Johnson on the Tuesday BOCC work session, as discussed yesterday in Part Four.
Former County Manager Derek Woodman and Development Services Director Flowers made a determination, several months ago, that future airplane hangers would be required to follow normal building codes and land use regulations. Under this new policy, no new hangers can be allowed along the Bravo taxiway until the County and hanger owners find a way to fund new fire hydrants with sufficient water pressure — specified at 1500 gallons per minute.
Thus, the discussion on Tuesday about using $40,000 in taxpayer funding to do preliminary engineering for a 10-inch water line down the taxiway. Next, find the money somewhere, to install the line. (I am estimating $1 million, based on information from Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District staff.)
That answers three of my questions. What will these upgrades cost? No one knows. Who will foot the bill? To be decided. Why have the hangers been exempted from the building codes? Previous BOCC policy, which has now been changed.
A comment by Commissioner Brown:
“As a commissioner, I welcome public input. Being a commissioner, it’s not about what my desires are; I’m to represent the community as a whole. As a whole, as best I can. And it’s important for me to know what the constituents want.
“If it’s an issue that is backed by data and information, I don’t have a problem supporting that…
“With the information that was presented Tuesday, it appears that the 6-inch line that the County currently has is inadequate for providing the ‘gallons per minute’ flow that’s required. I think it’s incumbent upon the County to bring that line up to code — not necessarily at exclusively the taxpayers’ expense — and to provide adequate flow for fire protection. Not only for the hangers, but I understand it may increase the water pressure for the adjacent subdivisions, if it were hooked in…”
But the fourth question…
Why is the Airport Manager talking about more, future hangers along the Bravo taxiway, when promises were made in the past to locate future hangers on the opposite (north) side of the main runway?
Neither Ms. Flowers nor Commissioner Brown wanted to comment on claims that previous agreements and airport plans discouraged hanger expansion on the Bravo taxiway and specified the area near the FBO as the proper site for additional hangers.
Here’s an excerpt from a 2006 article written by journalist Leanne Goebel in the Four Corners Business Journal, concerning the construction of the then-new FBO building:
The biggest issue is water. The facility needs 1,500 gallons per minute for fire safety, which it didn’t have. An auxiliary pump was installed at Industrial Circle; then the County had to enclose the pump station in a housing. Next, they needed to provide power for the pump station. Now Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation says not to turn on the pump station because they can’t regulate the flow of water…
“It’s sort of like buying a car and you go to pick it up and they say, no, I’m sorry, you’ll have to come back because we need to put an engine in it…”
[FBO Manager Robert] Goubitz said the problems stem from a lack of oversight and improper planning from the previous County administration, including former airport manager Rob Russ…
Eighteen years ago, the County knew about fire flow problems at the airport. I have to assume that the problem eventually got fixed on the north side of the main runway, where the FBO is located. (But that’s an assumption.)
The vacant land around the FBO looks out on industrial development in the Cloman Industrial Park, and seems to be the best place for additional metal hangers — which look plainly industrial.
By comparison, the undeveloped east end of the Bravo taxiway is surround by agricultural estates. Not an ideal location for industrial metal buildings?
One more question, then. Do all three commissioners welcome public input?