Posts filed under 'Oregon Land Use'
Here:
And Metro, the regional government that manages the zoo, may seek as much as $90 million for a bigger elephant habitat, new veterinary hospital and new zoo education campus.
You are seriously about to ask taxpayers to pay $90 million… for elephants??
Now, look, I totally support your captive breeding program of Columbia Basin pygmy rabbits. I think the money spent on the condor breeding program is probably better spent elsewhere.
But now you want millions more to build a better home for a bunch of elephants? In Portland, Oregon?
Is that a joke?
And they will use whatever tactics they can to push this through:
Adding to the push in Portland is the fact that general elections draw more Democrats, especially in presidential election years, and they generally “are much more willing to fund progressive causes,” said Portland Commissioner Sam Adams. “That’s why everybody aims to November.”
How clever of quick-to-anger Sam Adams, and others, to take advantage of the peculiarities of different election cycles to get their taxes through!
February 11th, 2008
In Corey v. State of Oregon, the Oregon Court of Appeals rightly held that a decision by the government to modify, remove or
not apply a land use regulation is a protected right that cannot simply be taken away from property owners merely at the whim of the government.
There is no doubt that Measure 49 attempts to eliminate all current Measure 37 claims. Measure 49’s passage raises a significant issue for current Measure 37 claimants: can the government – through Measure 49 – simply eliminate Measure 37 claims that are protected rights under the federal constitution?
The significance of the answer to this question should not be lost on anyone. If the Court of Appeals’ decision in Corey stands, then Measure 37 claimants cannot lose their rights, because those rights are protected by the constitution. Which would in turn mean that decisions made pursuant to Measure 37 would remain unaffected by Measure 49’s passage.
The Court of Appeals’ decision in Corey has been appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court and is currently under review. With the passage of Measure 49, the Corey case has taken on a whole new
December 25th, 2007
“Furious” Dorothy English’s grandson:
“In 1953, she could have built 100 homes or a high-rise hotel if she wanted. All she wanted to do was divide it into eight parcels. We’re not talking greed; we’re not talking mass density.”
In 1953, my relatives could have developed an open-pit cyanide leach mine on farmland. But, like in the case of Madam English, various commonsense regulations now forbid such activity, or require that certain basic safety precautions are followed.
In 1953, I could drink a six pack of beer, drive without a seat belt to the local movies with my newborn in the driver’s seat (with no baby seat), smoke a few cigarettes (with the windows up), go eat at a restaurant for a couple of hours (leaving the baby in the car), and come back, after some more booze, and drive on home. Nowadays, darnit, I can’t! And that ain’t fair!
In 1953, relatives owned stock in Asbestos mining companies. A bunch of hooey regulations passed subsequently piping on and on about “health hazards” of asbestos. So the stock dropped. But, shoot, they bought that stock before any of these crazy government regulations, so shouldn’t the government have to compensate us for their restrictive regulations?!
December 25th, 2007
Some great photos and video here.
Some good photos and videos of the destruction of Marmot Dam, courtesy of PGE. It is amazing to think of the infrastructure that went into such a small output hydro project.
For those that are interested in dam removal, Little Sandy River Dam and the
3 mile wooden flume to Rosyln Lake are up for next summer, then the Elwha dams up in the Olympics.
December 19th, 2007
Wow, wow, wow!
My brother told me he spotted my house on Google Maps. I said, yeah, the satellite view ain’t that great… you can’t see that much detail. He said, NO, I can see YOU in front of your house from the street view.
WHAT?!
Yep… go to Google Maps. Go to Portland. Click on “Street View”. Then click on any street in Portland. Now you can “walk” the street up and down, and even rotate the camera right and left (and up and down). Amazing. Absolutely so cool.
If you look at where this is nationally, there are a few big cities, but Portland is lucky in that more or less our WHOLE CITY is on Google Maps Streetview (as opposed to, say, Los Angeles which has maybe 10% of the streets).
I actually saw one of the vans driving around with one of the weird black “globes” on the roof. And if you look at any streetview and pan “down”, you can see the vehicle taking the photos.
It looks like most of the photographing is done early in the am, as there are very few cars on the street. The freeways are more or less empty… weird. Maybe Sunday afternoon or morning. Hmmm, come to think of it, the time that I saw the van was Sunday morning.
For example, here is the 405 going over the river…
This helps date things (the Bagdad (sic) on Hawthorne)… click for larger:
December 18th, 2007
What good is a “college of forestry” that STILL practices clearcutting and, when two landslides wipe out homes and thousands of acres on clearcut land, they reply:
“Mother Nature threw a curveball at us,” he said. “It was a pretty intense storm event, so you’re going to have unexpected things happen.”
Yeah… uh, great.
“Mother nature” is to blame. One might say, rather, that CUTTING ALL THE %@!$! TREES down on sloped land is actually to blame!
Jeez Louise.. is this what Colleges of Forestry actually teach? That when things go wrong, blame “mother nature”?
(P.S., Remember when researchers who dared question whether salvage logging reduced wildfires were silenced, in part, by OSU?)
Close it down! We don’t need no stinkin’ college of clearcutting in Oregon!
December 18th, 2007
What’s the relationship between strip clubs and property rights? Profit at any cost to the community.Check it out:
The Anchor has been tangled in controversy in this town of 300 for more than three years after developer Steve Camden won permission from Tillamook County to add a third floor for hotel rooms.
Angry neighbors fought the addition, calling it an eyesore and saying it didn’t fit with the town’s community plan. The county insisted the expansion met zoning regulations and denied their appeals.
[...]
This fall, after losing money for months, [new owner] Piskorski shut down the tavern and put it up for sale. Then, Dec. 1, he reopened the doors to the once beloved salt-crusted inn with a new attraction he says is bound to pack them in: strippers.
December 16th, 2007
1000 Friends just came out with a “blueprint for Oregon’s future“.
There’s a lot of good ideas in it. I haven’t had a chance to go through it in detail yet.
December 6th, 2007
By the way here is an “artists rendering” of the beautiful, scenic, wonderful Bradwood Landing slated just upriver from the mouth of the mighty Columbia River… you can just feel how this amazing development will only do wonderful things for the river and the environment. After all, the executives behind the project said that, on net, this project will do more GOOD for the environment and salmon than if it didn’t exist.
Check it out:
Of course, this is the reality:
Do these sorts of things really belong in the Columbia River? Do they belong in Oregon when most of the gas will be shipped to California (after California, and freakin’ Tijuana, Mexico, rejected similar projects!). Do these belong in Oregon when it will result in only 50 new full-time jobs?
Check out Columbia Riverkeeper for more information.
December 4th, 2007
Ted Kulongoski is a dreadful governor. It was shocking and disgraceful how environmentalists supported this bozo in the last election. This is the same governor who says that increases in old-growth logging proposed under revisions to the NW Forest Plan use “sound science”. He appoints GOP partisans to critical state land use planning boards. He pushes for casinos in the Columbia River Gorge. He proposed that ALL Measure 37 claimants should get waiver transferability (even going against his own party).
And now…
Yep, Kulongoski appears to support a variety of destructive LNG Terminals in Oregon.
Gov. Ted Kulongoski has put state agencies on notice that he is open to proposals to build liquefied natural gas terminals in Oregon to diversify and shore up state energy supplies.
Ah, yes, it all comes down to shoring up state energy supplies. Even if that means that these LNG terminals are simply a backdoor to the California market (California, and that State’s GOP governor, REJECTED multiple LNG sitings):
Californians have blocked several proposed terminals, and critics say developers want to use Oregon as a back door to its southern neighbor. PG&E Corp., the parent company of California’s largest utility, has an ownership stake in the proposed pipeline that would bring gas from the Coos Bay terminal to the California border.
Backers of the proposed Bradwood Landing terminal near Wauna insist that virtually all of their gas would be used in Oregon and Washington, though they’ve told investors the terminal could serve California. Investors in the other Columbia River terminal near Warrenton, meanwhile, have told the California Energy Commission their terminal would help keep California pipelines full.
Both Columbia terminals could connect to interstate pipelines running to California through 200-mile pipelines that are proposed to run through prime Willamette Valley farmland and a big swath of the Mount Hood National Forest.
While the governor has directed the agencies to assert Oregon’s interests and closely evaluate the projects, he said the destination of the gas should not be a factor in the state’s evaluation of the merits or problems associated with LNG.
“The issues of energy diversity, price and supply stability, bridging to a renewable energy future are as important regionally as they are within Oregon,” the memo said.
Kulongoski is a moron.
And even the LNG developers know that they have Kulongoski in their pocket. After a “scathing assessment of the review process” by state agencies was leaked, “Joe Desmond, senior vice president of external affairs for Bradwood developer NorthernStar Natural Gas, emphasized the draft comments have yet to be reviewed by the governor’s office.”
“What you have to allow is for the process, and the governor’s office to reconcile comments received by staff and ensure it’s consistent with the overall goals of state and federal law in the process of doing that,” he said.
So, you see, Mr. Desmond knows that Kulongoski will tone down the criticism. Kulongoski cares nothing for the safety of Oregonians or the environment. And even his “natural resources advisor” admits as much when he says, “The question people ought to be asking, is not why hasn’t the governor spoken up. I think the more important question is, what if Oregon asserts all these questions and concerns that they want the pipeline companies and LNG facilities to address before getting a FERC license?” What? No, the question is why OUR GOVERNOR is not listening to the people who elected him!
December 4th, 2007
Browsing around I found this:
Destructively harvested tropical hardwoods - most likely including llegally logged woods - are being used in the interiors of at least two of Hoyt Street Properties’ Pearl District condominium developments that are being marketed for their “green” features. These materials, more scorched earth than green, include the mahogany lobby in The Metropolitan, and the “ebony” cabinets and “mahogany” flooring at The Encore.
[...]
Hoyt has declined several entreaties from Rainforest Relief to stop using tropical woods and develop a rainforest-safe wood use policy. With the high impacts of rainforest logging on biodiversity, carbon storage, and indigenous people, Hoyt is undoing much of the good that it does using other “green” building practices.
And there’s an interesting comment on that forum:
LEED is great - for energy. Unfortunately it has gaping holes, like what you see here with the rainforest mahogony. The problem is that LEED doesn’t “do” materials, except for a couple points if its local.
You could easily build a whole subdivision and use an entire forest of old-growth mahogony that was home to the last wild monkeys on earth as framing lumber for all LEED cares, as long as you do something goofy like a green roof and rainwater catchment - and cut them a nice check.
And there is a link from Rainforest Relief to an action page, but it is currently Page Not Found.
I am not sure what Rainforest Relief is… I have visited their site previously. They do have a Portland branch (although that may just be one person). Their site seems to be a bit out of date… indeed, their “latest” newsletter is Summer 2003. And their “recent actions” are also from 2003. I also don’t see a 990 for them, so they must receive less than $25,000 in annual donations?
December 4th, 2007
So how did the Big Look Task Force feel about Measure 49? After all, it was passed by the majority of Oregonians. Do the majority of Big Look Task Force members support it?
We have 10 people on the committee:
- One of them is a Hood River orchardist.
- One of them is a putative environmentalist who has voted to convert farmland into industrial zoning, voted against fish and wildlife, and voted to urbanize parts of Forest Park.
- One of them is a business CEO who has led “efforts to expand the availability of land in Oregon for jobs”.
- One of them is a property rights attorney who led the shameful Dolan escapade before the Supreme Court. She also donated $500 to fight against Measure 49.
- One of them is a politician.
- Another is a politician.
- One of them is a lawyer for a timber company and serves on the board for the pro-logging “American Forest Resource Council”.
- Another is a home developer.
- Another is a rancher.
- Another is undefined.
SO… if you didn’t know anything but the facts above, what findings do you think they would “find” about Oregon’s land use system? You have timber company execs, property rightists, home builders, and false environmentalists. Come on.
Who else can shed some more light on these members?
November 27th, 2007
Thanks to a commenter for pointing this out.
The Big Look Task force has won a pro-development award:
Task force members will be honored with the annual Hukari Award during an Oregon Association of Realtors banquet Thursday in Portland. U.S. Rep. Greg Walden is the keynote speaker.
The Hukari Award goes to individuals who have been instrumental in promoting Realtors’ ideals and values.
Oh, and the Hukari in the Hukari Award is a Measure 37 claimant.
Great. Just great.
This farce CANNOT continue. Why give so much power to a group of ranchers, property rights lawyers, and putative environmentalists?
MUCH of the attention of Land Use Watch will now turn to the Big Look Task Force. We will scrutinize the members, happenings, and impacts. If anyone has any information that might be of interest, please let me know!
November 27th, 2007
One of the current top articles on the NY Times Web site is this one, about a couple who built a “green” second home on 2 acres in Hood River.
WHEN Paul McKean and his wife, Amy Donohue, talked to county officials in Hood River, Ore., about buying a two-acre parcel to build their second home, they got a less than positive response.
“They said, ‘Oh yeah, that’s a tricky one,’” said Mr. McKean, a Portland architect.
In fact, 10 people had put an offer on the property, which sat on a flood plain, and then backed out, he said. But Mr. McKean and his wife were interested in going against the grain.
“Part of it was doing something on a marginal piece of land nobody wanted,” said Ms. Donohue, who is also an architect. Another goal was to “build small,” she said.
This sort of thing really annoys me. I don’t know these people, nor do I know any facts beyond what the article notes. But I get the impression that this couple feels as though they have done something noble, by building a small green house on poor, lonely land “that nobody wanted”. (What sounds like wetlands.)
Americans need to realize that green consumption is still consumption. And that building green does NOT excuse needless 2nd house development on small lots in agricultural areas. Now that this couple and their friends come hither and yon to the house, how does this impact farmers ability to move machinery and grow food on their nearby land? And maybe that farmer will eye this little house on 2 acres, and do the math and realize, hey, maybe I can sell my land into little subdivisions to rich liberal Portlanders who want to build green houses.
Why were there so many Measure 37 claims in Hood River? Could it be the fact that there is indeed huge demand from so-called “green” people like McKean and Donohue? Do these people have any sense of the larger picture outside of their cozy little board games in their award-winning house?
This modern dream of a 2nd house in the countryside needs to be thoroughly excised and debunked. See, here’s another. This modern house is at Smith Rock.
Rich liberal Portlanders need to realize that WE are the ones primarily responsible for the loss of agriculture and forestland to sprawl. Sure, we may not build ugly McMansions. We build tiny little ones that are green, with fancy solar power and dual flushing toilets. Oh and of course we want a few acres, because we want room for our pets and we want to be close to “nature”.
But the end result is still the same: a house on a small acre lot on rural land. That fragments habitat and farmland, increases congestion and pollution, and simply increases development pressures all around.
It has to stop.
November 9th, 2007
I just received this from the Elections Division:
George Packing Company??
November 7th, 2007
I’ve previously asked whether Measure 37 claims might exacerbate the risk to life and property when it comes to fires.
Now we know the answer.
And the answer is Yes.
This visualization tool allows you to see Measure 37 claims, and overlay the claims with fire risk. Here’s a screenshot:
Click on it to see it larger.
This shows the area around Medford, in southern Oregon. The red rectangles show Measure 37 claims. The green-yellow-orange background shows “wildfire risk” (with orange being “high” and green being “low”). As you can see, Measure 37 claims are spread across the map, in little isolated clumps (far from the reach of fire/safety) in high risk areas.
And here’s the same area showing Measure 37 claims in forested lands:
Intact ecosystems are going to lose out when lots of inholdings convert to subdivisions.
November 5th, 2007
This offers far more detail and overlays than Google Maps… but for Oregon only.
November 5th, 2007
This is outstanding. It lets you see Measure 37 claims as they relate to fire risk, forestland, conservation opportunities, ground water, and more.
November 5th, 2007
Yep, an article about bike culture in Portland:
Now, Ms. Birk said, the city is nurturing the cycling industry, and there are about 125 bike-related businesses in Portland, including companies that make bike racks, high-end components for racing bikes and aluminum for bikes mass-produced elsewhere. There are small operations that make cycling hats out of recycled fabric. Track, road and cyclo-cross races are held year-round, and state tourism groups promote cycling packages. There is Ms. Birk’s firm, which had two employees in Portland in 1999 and now has 14. There are nonprofit advocacy groups and Web sites, including www.bikeportland.org, that are devoted to cycling issues and events in Portland.
And in a photo caption:
Cyclists have long revered Portland, Ore., for amenities like on-street bicycle parking.
I’ll just point out that those on-street bike racks are like, what, 4 months old.
November 4th, 2007
With all the attention on Oregon’s Measure 49 (vote YES), it’s important to remember that there are still other major environmental issues in the West. Notably, the “Western Oregon Plan Revisions” which appear to be on the cusp of decimating much of the remaining old growth forests in Oregon.
This is complicated stuff, and I don’t claim to know the half of it. But the New York Times just published an article on this and sums it up this way:
Now the truce, the Northwest Forest Plan, is in jeopardy as one of the parties to it, the Bureau of Land Management, is rethinking its participation. It is proposing a threefold increase in logging on its 2.2 million acres in western Oregon, with greater increases in the old-growth stands that are the owls’ preferred territory. The land agency’s action would reduce by 10 percent the territory covered by the Northwest Forest Plan.
With the agency’s proposal, it seems that the timber industry, which never stopped pressing for access to more trees than the Northwest Forest Plan allowed, is getting what it had long sought in court.
How depressing.
And take a look at these graphics:
Notice the massive increase in lands available to logging compared to the “no action alternative”. And, sadly, since county funds are tied to logging revenues, rural counties (and politicians) are often in favor of these plans.
There’s already been a massive increase in logging in federal forests. (The Oregonian recently published an article on this, but I can’t find the link… help?) And this new plan is simply disastrous for forest ecosystems:
Jerry Franklin, a professor of ecosystem analysis at the College of Forest Resources at the University of Washington, said, “We are on the cusp of a point where the whole edifice could collapse.”
If the land agency’s share is taken out, the plan’s objectives in providing old-growth habitat for the owl cannot be met, Mr. Franklin said.
So, what to do?
Well, it’s SO important that you submit comments on this. Unfortunately, the BLM has made it EXTREMELY complicated to submit comments. It is almost as though they have tried to make it next to impossible to do so.
Okay, unless someone knows of an easier way, to submit comments you have to go to this BLM page (you can also view details of the plans here). Click on the middle icons and link. You will have to enter personal information and then view a complicated interactive map. There, you can view the amount of forest slated for logging (euphemistically noted as “timber management area”). Select “comment on alternatives” and individually select Alternatives 1, 2, and 3. For each, use the pop-up box to enter your comments. As part of your comments, consider focusing on the controversial aspects listed above, as well as these from the NYT’s article:
Bush administration officials in Washington suggested that a second option be prepared. As written, that option could allow for much more logging on the 2.2 million acres.
The new option sets aside no territory for the owl. Instead, it provides for ad-hoc decisions based on ongoing evaluations of the owl’s health. Crucial to both options was a determination that owls can thrive outside old-growth stands.
This summer, scientists, including those whose work was cited by the fish and wildlife agency, accused the service of misusing and cherry-picking the available science.
Incidentally, it is worth noting that Canada is pursuing an equally misguided approach to the spotted owl. Their solution is to capture all remaining owls and breed them. Hey, that way ALL lands can be logged and we can see the owls in the zoo!
October 18th, 2007
Will this be one of Smith’s rare green votes (always cast within a few months of a re-election bid)?
Dear Peter,
An army of auto industry lobbyists is swarming over Capitol Hill.
Their mission? To strangle a clean energy bill in the cradle — before you and I can enjoy better gas mileage and more renewable energy.
You’re in a perfect position to help stop them, because Senator Smith will be a swing vote on that bill when it emerges from conference and heads for a showdown on the Senate floor.
Your senator needs to hear from thousands of constituents like you right now — BEFORE that bill hits the floor. Your one phone call can do more to counter the auto lobbyists and deliver a clean energy future than any other single weapon we’ve got.
Please do your part by calling today:
Senator Gordon Smith: (202)224-3753
Your senator’s staffers will be happy to register your opinion on the energy bill. Tell them you want a strong energy bill with two key provisions:
1) A guarantee that new passenger vehicles will get an average of 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
2) A requirement for utilities to produce 15% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020.
After you’ve placed your call, please reply to this email message so we can track the progress of our campaign on Capitol Hill.
An energy bill with these two centerpiece provisions will cut America’s oil dependence, make a down payment on reducing global warming pollution, and — at long last — usher in a cleaner energy future.
We’ve waited two decades for Congress to pass legislation that could start breaking the chains of our enslavement to the automakers and Big Oil. We’re unlikely to get a second chance for many years to come.
Please seize this one chance for a clean energy future by calling your senator today!
Sincerely,
Frances Beinecke
NRDC Action Fund
October 11th, 2007
Check it out:
Efforts to accommodate a proposed large-scale resort in the federally protected Columbia River Gorge moved forward Tuesday despite objections from two decision-makers that the process is flawed.
First, a casino in the Gorge (thanks to Kulongoski!). Now, a mega-development. And, oh, who is leading this project? Why of course it is some dude from a timber company, Jason Spadaro, who also is against recent proposals for wilderness designation near Mt. Hood. That should give you a sense of what this guys true motives are.
October 10th, 2007
Partly cribbed from the City Club “yes” recommendation for Measure 49:
1969: Senate Bill 10 required comprehensive land use plans for every city and county.
1973: Senate Bill 100 and 101 led to adoption of 14 statewide planning goals and created statewide protections for farmland.
1976: First attack. Measure 12 sought to repeal SB 100. Failed by 60+%.
1978: Second attack. Measure 10 sought to repeal SB 100. Failed by 60+%.
1982: Third attack. Measure 6 sought to repeal SB 100. Fails by 55+%.
1993: Fourth attack. Legislature passes HB 3661 and expands ability to build houses on farm and forestland.
1995: Fifth attack. GOP introduces multiple bills that strip SB 100. Dems stop them.
1997: Sixth attack. GOP introduces multiple bills that strip SB 100. Dems stop them.
2000: Seventh attack. Measure 7 — an amendment to the Oregon Constitution which is subsequently declared illegal — passes through controversial (and uncontested) title language.
2004: Eighth attack. Measure 37 passes through controversial (and uncontested) title language.
So when people try to tell you that Oregonians have already voted twice to do away with land use planning in Oregon, you might tell them that, actually, we have already voted 6 times, directly or by proxy, to RETAIN SB 100 and commonsense land use planning in Oregon.
And Oregonians will once again, this November, vote Yes on Measure 49 and affirm our desire for commonsense protections of farmland, forest, and open space (not to mention clean water, clean air, no sprawl, and less congestion).
October 3rd, 2007
That’s the question I’m left with after reading this outstanding review of Portland’s restaurant scene in the NY Times. Time and again, chefs laud Portland, and Oregon, for local, organic produce. But with subdivisions replacing farms, can these guys survive?
Vote Yes on Measure 49!
September 27th, 2007
That’s the conclusion I come to, anyway!
After all, near the Joan of Arc statue at 39th and NE Glisan every Sunday for the past several months there’s been a sign for the far-right Dominionist “Vibrant Covenant Church”… you know, they’re one of those new “hip, cool” churches that nonetheless is evangelical and extremist. They chain their sign to the bus stop. And it’s there, Sunday after Sunday. And Trimet does nothing.
Here’s more on this cult:
Recent annual meeting resolutions have demonstrated that the ECC opposes abortion (with a life of the mother exception, but as of 2004 no longer excepting cases of rape and incest), affirms marriage as between a man and a woman, and opposes assisted suicide.
Trimet should put these vandals in their place…
September 23rd, 2007
Previous Posts
