[Archive Home][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
"City asked to permit off-site airport access"
- From: "Stephen Irwin" <stepheni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 22:00:06 -0600
Saturday, December 30, 2006
City asked to permit off-site airport access
BY ERIK SKOOG
The Roseburg (OR) News-Review
MYRTLE CREEK - A denied request for open access to the Myrtle Creek airport
from an adjacent property has raised the ire of some aviation enthusiasts.
D.R. Johnson, who owns property next to the airport and is leasing a hangar
to the Experimental Aviation Association Chapter 1444, said a verbal promise
to keep access open between the hangar and the runway is not being kept.
The issue came to bear when the EAA, which has a chapter in Roseburg and
expressed interest in establishing a chapter in Myrtle Creek, began
negotiations to lease a 1,300 square foot hangar on airport property for
$450 a month.
Those rates were too high, said Bruce Harrington, and the chapter began
negotiations with Johnson for use of his building on adjacent property,
which has a fence in front of it.
"We started talking to the city, basically (City Administrator Aaron Cubic)
about access and putting a gate in there, and he said 'no way'," said
Harrington, a member of the chapter's board of directors.
The reason access could not be granted is because Myrtle Creek has a
closed-fence policy regarding the airport, Cubic said. By allowing the EAA
access to the runway from an adjacent property, that policy would be
Johnson's property previously had access to the runway from 1989 to 1994,
when the airport had an open-fence policy.
"I never at any time said or denied them open access. The access was denied
from day one because we have a closed-fence policy," Cubic said.
In his October staff report to City Council, Cubic said that he was
approached by former Mayor Bob Cotterell, who said he had told Johnson "a
number of years ago" that there would be access to the runway.
Unfortunately, Cubic said, there is no record stipulating that the council
serving at the time had agreed or permitted indefinite access.
"The problem is that even though it might have been mentioned to (Johnson)
by a previous city official, there was no time it was put before council,
put in the minutes, put into a motion or anything," Cubic said.
Myrtle Creek's Airport Commission decided in October that the closed-fence
policy would stand, continuing the prohibition against the open access to
the runway, and the city council took no further action. City staff members
were directed by the airport commission, however, to find a way to
grandfather in the property based on the previous agreement allowing open
Current efforts to do so have had no success, Cubic said. The northwest
office of the Federal Aviation Administration, the agency that provides
funding to Myrtle Creek for some airport projects and also recommends the
closed-fence policy, said it does not recognize a grandfather clause, Cubic
said in his November staff report to the city council.
Further complicating matters is the revenue Myrtle Creek could lose if
off-site access to the runway is allowed. The airport revenue is less than
$10,000 annually from hangar rentals, tie-down fees and other operations.
There is still more room for expansion at the airport, Cubic said.
If access cannot be granted, the EAA chapter will have to move elsewhere,
Post your opinion on this story in the CAA General Aviation Forum
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
If you have any queries regarding this issue, please Email us at email@example.com