Urban and rural reserves in Wash and Clack Co: The debate rolls on

by: Andy Maggi | November 20, 2009 - 11:52

Land use gets a lot of recent  ink in local papers

It ain’t over till the fat lady sings is a phrase we all know well and like the phrase the Urban and Rural reserve planning process continues. The hotbed of activity for these discussions remains the farmland north of Hillsboro in Washington County, as well as the Stafford area in Clackamas County--which has been in the news lately.

Right now, Metro is taking a big-picture look at urban and rural land designations, something that's never been done within the scope they are now working. Negotiations are in the hands of the Core 4 group (a representative of each of the counties and one from Metro) that will pass their negotiated plans back to the counties for approval. The debate has been all over the news:

It's hard to tell which direction the reserves process is heading. While we have seen some progress toward protecting vital farm land for the next 50 years, there are still questions about whether it will be enough. No one is talking about that more than the folks at Save Helvetia.
At the same time, some are pushing for delays or for maintaining the status quo, arguing that we shouldn't change what has been working for the metro region so far (periodic reviews of the Urban Growth Boundary). To me this is unacceptable and misses the point.
Sure, UGB reviews allow some small course corrections over time. But without a better process in place, any area under consideration for rural or urban reserve designation are up for consideration every time the UGB is up for review with nothing more than soil quality guiding the discussion. A more refined process can help create some guidance for those periodic reviews by telling planners where to look first versus what we want to protect well into the future.
We shouldn't be asking our elected leaders to accept the status quo. By addressing even a small portion of this debate today, future discussion becomes a little easier. What we should be demanding is an approach that gives guidance for the next 50 years and establishes a map that will protect local food systems and farms and allows for smart growth, not one that would allow cities to pave over some of our most fertile and important farm land in the region.
Filed in:
Topic | 
Read more blog posts »

Comments

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Oregon League of Conservation Voters | 320 SW Stark St., Ste. 530 | Portland, OR 97204 |  Phone: 503-224-4011 | Fax: 503-224-1548