Airport re-use narrowed down to three choices

Dusty Spomer and Wade Werbelow with GDA Associates out of Cody held a second airport re-use meeting at the county annex on Monday night to present three possible options for re-puposing the area based on public comment from the first meeting in the spring.

At that first meeting, a steering committee was created, consisting of the three county commissioners, Brad Basse, John Dorman, Sr., Kevin Skates, Meri Ann Rush, Donnie Bjhorus, Bo Bowman, Amanda Moeller and Dustin Hunt.

The main objectives for the committee were to investigate public and private uses for the area and maintain or improve harmony and compatibility with the surrounding lands. The best use of the property should involve an option that has a positive economic impact, is financially viable, supports community needs and is compatible with surrounding uses.

Werbelow said existing access to the former airport is going to be a critical piece to whatever project is finally chosen.

Known for being narrow, steep and winding, Airport Road poses a safety concern, especially during the winter months.

GDA dertermined which buildings are on actual airport property and which ones belong to the golf course.

Two large hangars, a storage building and a pole shed for equipment storage along with a small hangar on the edge of the apron and two small metal sheds all belong to the airport. The former airport office and remaining buildings all belong to the golf course.

Three alternatives were created for the re-use, based on public comment.

Airpark/Fly-In residential development: This alternative would include keeping the runway pavement with additional access to Hwy 20 and another access at the back of the property. Single family homes would be built in the area, too, allowing for summer homes or homes where residents could fly in to the airport and park their planes on their property.

Compatibility wise, this fits in with the prior land use, but an airport really isn’t highly harmonius with residential homes or golf.

Economically, this alternative would not create much of an economic impact for the county as it wouldn’t create jobs except in the building stage and wouldn’t create any sort of product. Werbelow added their study of the area shows there isn’t a high demand for residential lots in the county, so the area could sit unused for an extended period of time.

In the end, the Airpark/Fly-In residential development alternative does not meet the highest or best use scenario for the property.

Mixed use/residential development: This alternative would use much of the pavement that is already in place for light industrial lots.

The remaining hangars could be repurposed for various uses and commercial buildings, shops and so forth could be added. The current apron would make a great parking lot for the businesses.

Homes could also be built in the area, but again, there isn’t much call for residential lots so they could remain empty for some time.

Economically, the mixed use scenario could be advantageous if it attracted retail or light manufacturing or industrial use.

With all of this taken into consideration, the mixed use/residential development alternative could be identified as highly beneficial to the county.

Convention center/resort: This alternative would allow for an opportunity the State Parks touched on in their Master Plan, that is tieing in with the State Park’s trails with hiking trails around T-Hill. There could be concessionnaires such as horse back riding and zip lines, making the area more attractive to tourists.

Initially, construction would create a lot of jobs, adding to the economic impact. There would be some permanent jobs if a hotel and convention center were added, adding to the county’s tax base as well.

This alternative would actually be a two-phase plan with the short term phase focusing on repurposing the apron and the long term phase being a hotel and convention center. The golf course could be expanded to a full 18 holes with this plan, too.

Short term items could include repurposing the large hangars into indoor basketball courts or archery range for recreational uses. These items could be done immediately while working toward the long term goal.

The convention center/resort alternative was deemed the best use for the area.

So where do we go from here?

Spomer indicated a marketing plan needs to be developed that will reach developers that might be iterested in a project like a hotel and convention center. In this scenario, the county would still own the property, but the developer would sign a long-term lease with the county.

As with all the alternatives, arrangements are going to have to be made with one or more landowners in order to build additional access from the property to Hwy 20.

Of course, there are always funding concerns.

Spomer suggested the county start applying for things like grants from the Wyoming Business Council. There is the possibility of funding from private funds (developer) and monies available to help with infrastructure items like water and sewer lines as well as electricity.

If used for small business efforts, there could be SLIB monies available as well as Business Council funding, U.S. Department of Commerce funding, economic development funds and even Wyoming Large Economic Development funding.

There are no absolute numbers on what the two-phase project would cost, that will come once it is determined exactly what pieces will be created.

If you have questions or comments about the proposed alternative, please feel free to email GDA Engineers at gda@gdaengineers.com.