Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fire Suppression topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Underwood residents urge keeping Huber Reservoir for fire suppression after PUD decision
Summary
Multiple Underwood residents told commissioners the Huber Reservoir should be preserved for local fire suppression, saying the tank—though not suitable for drinking water—would provide low-cost, local water supply for firefighting needs.
Underwood residents addressed the Skamania County Board of Commissioners during public comment on Feb. 25, urging county leaders to keep the Huber Reservoir available for fire suppression even though Skamania PUD plans to remove it from the public drinking-water system.
Bob Wittenberg, an Underwood resident who said his home is within several thousand feet of the reservoir, said the county should consider keeping the tank online as a fire reservoir rather than a potable-water reservoir. Wittenberg told commissioners that firefighting water does not require the same treatment as drinking water and that preserving the tank for fast fills of tenders would aid firefighting near residential properties that have been threatened by recent wildfires.
Patrick McConnell, another Underwood resident and homeowner affected by the Tunnel 5 fire, told the board he supports Wittenberg’s view. McConnell said firefighters could not rely on a nearby hydrant during the Tunnel 5 fire and argued that a 25,000‑gallon tank with a fast-fill system would be a relatively small expense for a significant improvement to local fire response. He asked county leaders to consider options for keeping the reservoir available for fire suppression while acknowledging PUD and county budget and jurisdictional boundaries.
Residents suggested routing a pipe or adding a fast-fill point closer to where past fires occurred to make tank water more usable for tanker trucks. Commenters said repairing leaks and keeping the tank wet for fire suppression purposes would cost far less than designing and operating a drinking‑water reservoir that meets state regulations.
Ending: Commissioners received the comments during the public-comment period. No formal county action on the Huber Reservoir was recorded in the meeting transcript; residents asked the PUD and county to coordinate on practical, lower-cost options to preserve the reservoir’s fire‑suppression value.
