NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — With the donation of kitchen equipment for the proposed airport restaurant, the Airport Commission met Tuesday to discuss how to manage the incoming equipment and how to best advertise the space.

 

"I like putting the equipment in there but letting whoever is going to go in there figure out where they are going to put it," Chairman James Haskins said during the commission meeting. "Because it does cost a lot of money to do that."

 

The commission has envisioned a restaurant in the renovated administrative building for years; however, with multiple Requests for Proposals (RFPs) going unanswered, the space has remained a shell. It was previously believed that the primary obstacle was the lack of kitchen equipment.

 

Earlier this year, Williams College offered to donate used kitchen equipment that is no longer needed because of an upcoming renovation. That equipment is scheduled for delivery in May.

 

Haskins asked whether the city should pursue a new RFP within the next few months or begin building out the kitchen before advertising the space. He suggested that while installing the equipment could make the space more attractive, it might also dissuade potential restaurateurs who have a different vision for the layout.

 

"We have pretty much a full kitchen," he said. "But I just don't know where any of it goes. Where does the grill go? Where does the fryolator go?"

 

There were also concerns that installing the equipment prematurely could impact the property's insurance and increase liability.

 

One suggestion was for the commission to work with a local restaurant owner to inventory the equipment and install items that have an obvious designated place in the building. Commissioner Robert Grandchamp added that the layout may largely depend on the location of existing utility hookups.

 

Haskins noted he has been in touch with Colleen Taylor of Freight Yard Pub, who visited the college to inspect the equipment. He felt her expertise could be a significant asset to the project.

 

Airport user and former commissioner Trevor Gilman attended the meeting and noted that during his tenure, the architect who designed the administrative building provided multiple layout designs. He said the commission at that time wanted to prioritize flexibility.

 

"The idea was to generally space the most expensive items that everyone was going to need," Gilman said.

 

Stantec engineer Peter Enzien said he could check with the former architect, Westall, to see if those documents are still available. He noted the space was clearly designed with specific areas for a bar, freezers, and an ice cream window.

 

However, Enzien suggested listing all available equipment in a future RFP rather than hooking it up now.

 

"From what I remember, that seems to be the biggest sticking point in the initial build-up," he said. "It would have been nice if we could have taken the project a little further, but MassDOT only put up the shell."

 

Commissioner Dean Bullett suggested hooking up some of the equipment so the city could utilize the space, perhaps in a "pop-up" capacity.

 

"Almost like a demo space where we can have pop-up stuff if people want to come in," he said. "... But if we want a long-term tenant, we want them to have the flexibility to design it the way they want it."

 

The commission tabled all decisions for the evening, but Bullett emphasized the need to make headway on the project.

 

"I think we need a plan. Are we putting this out to bid again? Are we going to set it up?" he asked. "I feel like we have to decide one way or another what direction we are going to go in. We have been sitting on it a while already. If we want to do this this decade, we need to get moving."

 

Haskins suggested hiring a marketing agency to assist with the process, though Bullett argued that this would be an unnecessary expense and suggested instead issuing another RFP with the equipment listed.

 

Gilman chimed in again, suggesting the city should simplify the RFP process to attract more interest.

 

"RFPs from the city have been way too complicated," he said. "I think we can simply ask, 'Please give us your ideas,' period. And anyone can respond, and you can throw it in the trash if you don't like it. There have been RFPs with so much language no one can respond to it."

 

Bullett agreed, adding that if the next iteration of the RFP fails, the city should explore a formal pop-up restaurant model.

 

Gilman concluded by reiterating his long-held opinion that the airport should be managed by a fixed-base operator (FBO) rather than the city or commission.

 

"I think everyone has heard my opinion now for 10 years. ... This airport should be an FBO management model," he said. "All of those pieces should be under private management. Let them figure it out. All of the really nice, small airports are all private, and they are all busy because there is a financial element of every aspect of them. We have danced around that for many years."