KEEPING THE PORT REAL

Submitted to Shelton Blog by Tom Davis Mason County Progressive

Excerpt from:
CITIZEN EDITORIAL
Shelton Hills Development
By Mark Hall, Developer, Shelton Hills

In his recent statement, Port Commissioner Jay Hupp claims the Port is merely defending the airport. The reality is that the Shelton Hills project poses no threat to the airport whatsoever. The real consequence of the Port’s actions is to block economic renewal for Shelton and Mason County.

It has been said that the Port of Shelton is the economic engine that drives Mason County. Unfortunately those at the wheel are driving in the wrong direction. Port officials fail to recognize that in order to attract the executives and employees of new industry to Mason County, the region must provide expanded retail services and modern housing. The Port is in no position to accomplish this. In contrast, the Shelton Hills development will provide expanded and modern retail services and high quality housing, as well as a professionally designed and appointed business park that the region needs in order to attract business to the area.

Mr. Hupp has stated that residences in our project will be built right up to the airport fence and that there would be no buffer between the airport and housing. This is factually incorrect. Actually, we will have an industrial park together with an extensive wetlands buffer between our residentially zoned properties and the airport. This buffer from the airport ranges from 2000 to 3000 feet wide.

Mr. Hupp is acting like Chicken Little when he talks about noise complaints. The Port has offered no proof that there will be a noise issue. In fact, the Port’s own studies show that airport noise will not pose a problem for residential development. The Port need only examine the work of its own consultants to calm its baseless hysteria and fears.

Mr. Hupp claims that the re-zone of a small portion of our land inventory from industrial to residential will “stifle business development” by reducing the amount of industrial and commercial land inventory available. The lack of inventory of commercial and industrial land that Mr. Hupp refers to is illusory. The demand for industrial and commercial land in Mason County is nowhere near available inventory capacity and to assert otherwise is frankly ridiculous. The County has enough industrial land for the next 20 years at least, even with the Shelton Hills conversion from industrial to residential property. The Growth Board has affirmed this fact.

Mr. Hupp fails to ask himself why there would be any demand for this remote piece of industrial property when the Port cannot find users for the thousands of acres of it’s own developed land that already has infrastructure serving it. Furthermore, Hupp knows full well that the Shelton Hills property in question is too steep for industrial uses. It is hard to imagine that there will ever be a market strong enough to pay for the cost of hillside industrial development behind the existing residential zoned property in our project, when so much perfectly flat and easily accessible land is already available.

As outlined in Mr. Hupps statement, we now hear, for the very first time, his latest argument that somehow the re-build of the Wallace-Kneeland interchange will inhibit mobility by making it “all but impossible for truck traffic” to move between the Wallace-Kneeland interchange and the Johns Prairie industrial park. Public officials must be held accountable for the truthfulness of their statements.

The fact is that Mr. Hupp's Port was directly involved in a 24 month long process that included the City, the County, the Transit Authority, the State Department of Transportation, and many very experienced and informed traffic engineers regarding the redesign of the Wallace-Kneeland interchange. With the Port’s direct involvement, the interchange was specifically configured to handle hog fuel trucks, pole trucks and logging trucks to allow free flowing movement and eliminate unnecessary stoplights. This was a primary design objective in order to improve mobility to Johns Prairie. Now the Chairman of the Port Board of Commissioners asserts it will be “all but impossible” to get through there. This is certainly a curious statement, to put it mildly.

Mr. Hupp states that the Port “has always been in support” of the Shelton Hills project. In fact the Port has initiated several lawsuits against the project. Until the lawsuits that we are defending have been settled, we cannot proceed forward. Mr Hupp knows this. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Mr. Hupp and the rest of the Port Commissioners and its Director, John Dobson, are preventing the citizens of the City of Shelton and Mason County from realizing the benefits of the project. They are single handedly attempting to destroy our project with unsupported and false allegations, some of which I outline here, and by employing a strategy based on outright abuse of the legal process. It is the elected officials of the City of Shelton who have jurisdiction over our land and who the people have selected to decide what is right for them, not the Port Commissioners.

We have a carefully thought out and financed plan to create infrastructure, retail services, industrial development, housing and jobs. We have deep experience at this and we are committed to the success and responsible stewardship of our plan. This plan will be implemented over many years, and we are here for the long haul. This plan will go a long way towards ending the economic despair in the community.

Mr. Hupp and fellow Port Commissioners I ask you point blank, what is your plan? If the Port does not have a sound, economically, environmentally and socially responsible plan for economic development, it should get out of the way of those who do.

Maybe it is time for the voters of Mason County to ask what exactly is the value in having a separate municipal government entity like the Port of Shelton? Do they pay their way, or are they really just an obstruction to progress and the efficient delivery of cost effective government services to the citizenry? Would it be better to collapse the Port and divvy up the oversight to the County and the City? Could the County and the City run the Port activities without the duplication in staff and save the taxpayers a few bucks? Could the Port owned land be sold off to private owners and the proceeds used to improve the roads and schools of the City and Mason County?

I believe that a continuation of the questionable behavior of the recent leadership of the Port of Shelton should cause all citizens of Mason County to take notice and start asking these sorts of questions.

Mark Hall, Developer, Shelton Hills

Link to complete article:
http://masoncountydailynews.com/voices/citizen-editorial