By RAELYNN RICARTE
News staff writer
June 6, 2007

The Best Western Hood River Inn has filed a Measure 37 claim in an attempt to get a riparian protection zone removed from its hotel lobby.

“We kept thinking that they (city officials) were going to reverse the language (in Ordinance 1874) but they never did,” said Chuck Hinman, general manager.

“We have no choice but to try to regain the zoning that we had.”

The Measure 37 claim filed last week by Hinman on behalf of DM Stevenson Ranch is the first to be received by the city. The claim requests almost $2 million in compensation for devaluation of the property due to lost development rights. The company’s holdings comprise 12 acres to the east of Highway 35 and the toll bridge — and extend more than 100 feet into the Columbia River.

Hinman said the figure listed in the Measure 37 claim is a conservative estimate of the financial hit taken by the business. He said the city, by imposing regulations that prohibit most groundbreaking activities, has made it almost impossible to modify the Inn’s footprint. And that ties the company’s hands from meeting any change in market demands.

Until 2006, the Hood River Inn — which has sat atop fill material next to a rip-rap bank for 40 years — had no setback for waterfront activities. Hinman and Tom Stevenson, one of 25 partners and the on-site manager, had begun discussing remodeling plans with city staffers. They wanted to build an indoor pool at the eastern end of the building. They also wanted to expand the boat dock to provide more recreation opportunities.

Those plans came to a halt when the Hood River City Council decided early last year to impose a 75-foot setback along the entire shoreline under its jurisdiction. Officials said the boundary complied with the state’s Goal 5 planning rule for wildlife habitat preservation.

The city’s regulatory move placed the Inn’s dining deck and the Riverside Grill within the riparian zone. Also included were the north-facing rooms along the west wing and a section of CEBU Bamboo Lounge.

Bob Francis, city manager, said despite the new Measure 37 claim, he remains willing to resume discussions with Hinman and Stevenson.

“This doesn’t mean that we can’t go back to the drawing board with the Hood River Inn to see if we can find an amicable solution,” he said. “And, if we do reach an agreement, they can always withdraw their claim.”

In addition to the Measure 37 claim, the Inn is also reactivating its case before the Land Use Board of Appeals. The business put that action on hold in a previous attempt to resolve the issue. Hinman and Stevenson are determined that, one way or another, the setback gets lifted.

Stevenson said, for more than one year, he has expected common sense to prevail — but time has run out.

“We just figured that if we hadn’t heard from the city by now they didn’t intend to do anything about this. So it was up to us,” he said.

Last fall, Stevenson agreed to a 21-foot setback, the measurement of the building closest to the shoreline. However, he ended up withdrawing that agreement after the city council spent two hours wrangling over the proposal. He said it became clear during that discussion that some members of the elected body intended for the ordinance to be used as a “no build” zone.

In a follow-up interview, Stevenson said it was disheartening to spend time and money arguing over a state planning rule that was no longer even mandated.

At the Oct. 10 hearing, Councilor Paul Cummings revealed that the Department of Land Conservation and Development had stopped requiring enactment of Goal 5 regulations because “it didn’t work; it was really a problem.”

Stevenson also contends the reluctance of city officials to remove the riparian corridor from his building raises an issue of fairness. The industrial building that formerly housed Nichols Boat Works is located on a natural bank along the Boat Basin. However, the city is allowing residences to be built on that land right up to the water’s edge.

Meanwhile, he said the economic needs of the Inn appear to be discounted.

In addition to providing continuous employment for 165 people, the business puts $500,000 in the city coffers every year from utility fees and property taxes. In addition, the average guest also spends about $150 per day in town during a stay.

The city’s original Goal 5 ordinance in 2005, approved by DLCD, exempted the Inn property as wildlife habitat because the grounds were almost fully developed and provided social and economic gains for the community. Stevenson believes that plan, derailed by citizen activists, made more sense than the current setback.

In February the city council considered loosening some of the restrictions on the Inn by making its buildings a conforming use. That would have allowed the business to repair the existing footprint without jumping through bureaucratic hoops.