Good news, bad news, in land use

The Mercury‘s Scott Moore reports in this week’s “In Other News” column that a City of Portland Land Use Hearings Officer has ruled that the city has the right to require landowners to allow pedestrians and bicyclists to use a designated city trail running across their property. SK Northwest has long resisted allowing public access on a portion of the Springwater Trail near OMSI and the Willamette River. At least two more property owners need to allow use of the trail before it can be completed. The City’s decision, which can be appealed to the state Land Use Board of Appeals (known in acronym-welcome locations as LUBA), is hugely significant in reaffirming the city’s right to set zoning, streets, trail designations and suchlike for the benefit of the long term public good. This ruling has been a long time coming, and I thank Scott for highlighting it. I also commend the eastside neighbors, Neighborhood Assocations, and Southeast Uplift neighborhood coalition, for diligently sticking with the case over an extended period. Remember their advocacy on this before making disparaging remarks about NIMBYs (“Not In My Back Yarders”, possibly my least-favorite acronym of all) in whatever’s the next debate about building height/coverage, please.

Such as, the following bad news from the Buckman neighborhood. Volunteers there have lost their appeal of an Adjustment approval at LUBA (Land Use Board of Appeals, remember?). The state appeal board basically said that if the city found it reasonable that the elimination of loading spaces (see full explanation in the link in the previous sentence) did not negatively impact traffic safety on adjacent streets, then they had to uphold the city’s decision. This is consistent with a long history of LUBA decisions allowing jurisdictions to interpret their codes as they see fit… meaning the way the codes are written is important. The clearer, the better. We need a change in the Adjustment review Approval Criteria, in my opinion, to ensure development is permitted with tighter controls protecting neighborhood quality of life. Neighbors will continue the fight over developments in Buckman. Learn more, and please consider donating to help their cause, at the Development in the Buckman neighborhood web site. Their legal bills to date total just over $5000, and they welcome tax-deductible contributions. Please make checks out to Give a Buck for Buckman, c/o Southeast Uplift, 3534 SE Main Street, Portland, OR 97214. “No amount is too small.”

In other land use media coverage, which is bad news but good that it’s coming to light, Willamette Week‘s Nigel Jaquiss does us all a favor by in-depth coverage of a landfill on the banks of the Tualatin River in Washington County. It’s long, but Grapes of Trash is well worth reading. The dump sounds disgusting, its continued existence disgraceful. “Among the numerous substances Lakeside has accepted over the years, according to DEQ records, are “non-hazardous industrial waste sludge from the Tektronix wastewater treatment plant,” as well as prohibited substances: cafeteria wastes, household garbage, paint cans, oil filters and jugs of used motor oil, “baghouse dust and chromium-containing sludge ash.” The dump also accepted sands from a company called Western Foundry that DEQ records say “are known to have contained zirconium which has low level nuclear radiation. Dusts associated with Western Foundry operations have contained elevated concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and zinc.””, the article states.

And EEUUWWW! It looks like Metro is either going to give the owner one sweetheart deal, or another.

“Last week, Metro told Grabhorn that if he agrees to close Lakeside by July 1, 2012, it will exempt him from recycling between now and then. Neighbors are wary of the proposal. On one hand, Kamp says, it could give them what they want—closure—albeit in five years, during which time anything could end up in the dump. On the other hand, exempting Grabhorn from a recycling policy with which others must comply perpetuates his ability to evade the rules….Metro Council President David Bragdon says his agency is attempting to be responsive to neighbors’ concerns. “Lakeside wasn’t really a priority issue for us until recently because the other agencies have far more control,” Bragdon says. “But our contract does give us some leverage.”

Ya think? Maybe not. The article continues,

“In recent negotiations with DEQ, Washington County and Metro, however, Grabhorn’s representatives have raised the threat that a recycling mandate or forced premature closure could imperil his ability to pay for clean-up costs and the 30 years of post-closure monitoring that are by law his responsibility. That has led to a series of proposals, including one from Metro that the public take over his mess and create a memorial to him.”

“A written proposal circulated in early June suggested that Metro “consider purchase of [Grabhorn’s] Tualatin Riverfront property for the purchase of a Metro open space.” Grabhorn would then put those Metro dollars—approved by taxpayers last November—toward his obligation to clean up the dumpsite.”

That makes me angry. Voters didn’t approve two Greenspaces bonds to give the money to polluters shirking their clean-up responsibilities. Metro is even talking of naming the new park “Grabhorn Park”.

Absent from Nigel’s coverage is information provided by Citizens for Oversight of the Beaverton Landfill, reporting the owner/operator, Howard Grabhorn, has petitioned Washington County to allow the landfill to triple in size under a Measure 37 claim. Horrible. The neighbors have been arguing the landfill is exempt under Measure 37’s exclusion for health and safety laws, but they’ve faced an uphill battle against a wealthy landowner with experienced attorneys. Vote Yes on Measure 49 in November, to make land use laws more in line with what the majority thought Measure 37 said. Please read the entire Willamette Week article, if you’re considering posting a comment here that expansion of a landfill out of compliance with numerous environmental protection standards was what voters wanted in Measure 37.