Land Use Planning
Land-use planning can be complex and legalistic. However whether your site of concern is a wetland, riparian area, upland habitat or an entire watershed, land-use planning will be absolutely critical in determining its fate. Both Oregon and Washington have statewide land-use planning systems that require county and municipal governments to develop land-use plans that conform to broad statewide mandates. These include requirements that local governments consider natural resources in developing their land-use plans. Other state and federal laws protecting water quality and quantity, wetlands, and threatened or endangered species are partially implemented through local land-use plans. Having some understanding how state and local land-use planning work or do not work for natural resources conservation is essential to being an effective local natural resource advocate.When participating in land-use decisions, it is important to understand the difference between legislative land-use decisions and the administrative or quasi-judicial land-use decisions. Legislative decisions establish local zoning and/or development standards that apply throughout a municipal jurisdiction or district; they consider a broad scope of evidence and public input. Administrative or quasi-judicial decisions determine whether and how a specific development will be permitted on particular site; they usually are made based on specific criteria already established in preceding legislative decisions, provide fewer opportunities for public input, and result in a narrower range of outcomes. Unfortunately most citizens become concerned and involved (and sometimes frustrated) during administrative and quasi-judicial decisions that occur when a specific development is proposed and a particular natural area threatened. At this point, it is often either too late to “save” a site or at least very difficult and expensive.1 Savvy and effective citizen advocates get involved in legislative land-use decisions that shape rules and criteria that determine how and where development is allowed and local ecosystems protected and restored in specific administrative or quasi-judicial land-use decisions.
Today most legislative land-use planning decisions relating to natural resources conform to the broad mandates of federal environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act or Clean Water Act. Nevertheless, in both Oregon and Washington, state land-use laws and administrative rules provide considerable latitude at the local level. Hence while natural resource protection and restoration strategies might be driven in part by federal law, they require local knowledge and sustained leadership and advocacy to be effective.
1 In most cases this will require either a skilled land-use attorney. If you get involved at the administrative and quasi-judicial decisions it is important to understand where decision makers have discretion in determining outcomes and to focus your public comments on the relevant criteria.
Reforming Land-Use Planning In Oregon
Despite strong and growing public support for environmental protection, many citizens, planners, and natural resource advocates have questioned the efficacy of the land-use planning system in translating those values into protection of Oregon’s high value natural areas and ecosystem lands. Several structural problems weaken the system:- Natural resource protection is scattered among at least four different planning goals. Goal 5 instructs jurisdictions “to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.”Goal 6 addresses maintaining air and water quality. Goal 7 addresses preventing natural hazards and disasters and Goal 15 addresses the Willamette River Greenway. Natural resource issues need to be addressed comprehensively rather than in isolation.
- Goal 5 is process rather than outcome oriented. Goal 5 delineates a long and complex process for inventorying and evaluating natural resource protection, but ultimately mandates no specific outcomes. The process is riddled with opportunity for natural resources areas to be removed from consideration. Hence, the strength and effectiveness of local Goal 5 programs depend largely on local leadership and political will with mixed results. The State needs to set clear and specific objectives for the protection of natural resources.
- Natural resource planning goals fail to address restoration and enhancement. Oregon’s watersheds are degraded from past development and habitat destruction but have tremendous potential for restoration to recover and improve water quality, wildlife habitat, and public health and safety. The planning goals need to address land needs for ecosystem restoration. For example, Goal 5 requires inventory of resources based on existing—not potential—quality and quantity.
- Flows of water and wildlife don’t recognize city and county lines, but our current planning system mandates that resources be protected based upon political rather than natural boundaries. A more effective approach would recognize the need to protect natural resources based upon the geography of natural landscapes or watersheds rather than on historic boundaries of cities and counties.
- The land-use planning system explicitly prioritizes the protection of farm land and provision of residential housing over natural resources. Urban areas area required to maintain a 20 year supply of buildable land and are further required to bring farm land into Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs) only as a last resort. As a result, cities are often forced to expand onto the most sensitive natural resource lands. As precious as farm land is, we need a better balance.
1For further reading see “To Save Or To Pave: Planning for the Protection of Urban Natural Areas” (1994) published by Audubon Society of Portland and 1000 Friends of Oregon or “No Place for Nature : The Limits of Oregon’s Land Use Program in Protecting Fish and Wildlife Habitat in the Willamette Valley” (2002) published by the Defenders of Wildlife available online.
Land Use and Planning – OREGON
The latitude given to local communities in determining levels of environmental and natural resource protection remains both a strength and a weakness in Oregon’s land-use planning system.
Four of nineteen statewide goals could relate directly to natural resource protection. They include goals for water quality (Goal 6), natural hazards (Goal 7), and the Willamette River Greenway (Goal 15). Cities and counties typically have regulations for grading, erosion control, and stormwater management in compliance with Goal 6, standards regulating development in landslide or flood hazard areas under Goal 7, development rules for the Willamette Greenway for Goal 151.
Oregon’s most widely known but most unevenly applied natural resource planning goal is Goal 5 for natural resources. It covers a wide range of historic, open space, and natural resource values (both extractive and nonextractive). Under Goal 5 each city and county must conduct an inventory and document the presence and quality of Goal 5 resources (wetlands, streams, fish and wildlife habitat, open space, archaeological resources, aggregate resources, historic sites, etc.). Local governments must then determine which resources are significant, analyze the consequences of protecting or not protecting significant resources, and develop an appropriate protection program. Unfortunately this process is riddled with opportunities to decide not to protect natural resources. Despite this, some local governments have adopted strong natural resource protections for the highest value natural areas; but Goal5 programs still vary widely throughout the region and state.
The weaknesses of Goal 5 relative to Goals 3 and 4 for farmland and forest protection are symptomatic of the structural imbalances in Oregon’s land-use planning system that have led to partial or piecemeal protection of local ecosystems in urban areas. Many have argued for reforming land-use planning in Oregon to put greater emphasis and focus on comprehensive natural resource planning.
1Ordinances governing tree preservation and planting are usually adopted to comply with any of these goals. See,“Tree Protection and Planting”.
Wetlands, Riparian Zones, and “Buffer” Zones
Some confusion exists regarding the definition of wetland and riparian resources and the “buffer zones” often used to protect water quality, wildlife habitat, or other public values.Wetlands are defined by the state and federal regulatory agencies as those areas that have water present during a certain number of days in the growing season and that have soils that support plants that have been classified as growing in wetlands. Riparian zones are those areas that are adjacent to waterways and wetlands. In the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan region there are usually ash, alder, willow, black cottonwood and western red cedar growing in this “zone of influence” or transition zone between the water body and uplands. Depending on the water body and the width of its floodplain, if there is one, riparian zones can range up to more than a thousand feet in width, but are rarely functional when less than 50 or 75 feet. This is because riparian ecosystems are dynamic; they change over time with flows of water and sediment in a process that creates and recreates the conditions supporting water quality and fish and wildlife.
The term “buffer zone” is frequently misused interchangeably with “riparian zone.”A stream or wetland “buffer” or “buffer zone” are administrative terms referring to a defined distance between human activity or disturbance and natural feature — whether a stream, wetland, or natural area. The purpose of the buffer zone is to reduce the impacts of development and protect functions and values supported by the natural feature in question. Buffer zones should be used as areas that protect a resource (which includes the riparian zone) from adjacent land uses. The appropriate width of a buffer zone depends on
- the type of values to be protected (e.g. sediment control, shade, microclimate, nutrient cycling, wildlife corridors, etc) and
- the level of potential risk to maintaining these values.
Considerable scientific research has sought to identify minimum riparian zone widths to protect different ecological functions and values over time and at different degrees of risk. However, it falls to the public and to policy makers to ultimately decide if and to what degree these environmental functions and values will be protected.
Goal 15: The Willamette River
A special statewide planning goal addresses issues specific to the Willamette River Greenway. Only those jurisdictions that actually have land adjacent to the Willamette River have a local Goal 15 program. For general information about the Willamette River Goal, call the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). At the local level, the appropriate contact is the planning department in cities or counties that contain any part of the Willamette River within its jurisdiction. Additionally, the Oregon Division of State Lands is involved in location of any facilities that are placed in the Willamette since the state owns these submerged lands. If you have questions about state park management, jet skis and other motorized traffic issues, call Oregon State Parks and the Oregon Marine Board respectively.
City of Portland River Renaissance and River Plan
In February, 2006, the City of Portland adopted its River Concept Plan that provides a framework for a comprehensive update of the City’s 1987 Willamette Greenway Plan for Goal 15. The pending river plan will seek to balance and integrate goals for protecting and using the river. This will include making changes to rules governing riparian zone protection, setbacks, heights, trails, and public access associated with new development along the entire length of the Willamette River within the City of Portland.
Who Ya Gonna Call?
Local planning and park departments:
(see listing for local planning departments)
Oregon Department of Land Conservation:
(Portland): 503-731-4065,
fax 503-731-4068
(Salem): 503-373-0050, fax 503-378-5518
Oregon State Parks: 800-551-6949, fax 503-378-6447
Oregon State Marine Board: 503-378-8587, fax 503-378-4597
Portland Planning Bureau: 503-823-7700, fax 503-823-7800
Portland Parks & Recreation: 503-823-7529, fax 503-823-6007
Statewide Goal 6 (Water Quality) and Goal 7 (Natural Hazards)
City and County Goal 5 Programs
Washington Land Use and Planning
Citizen Involvement and Neighborhood Organizations
Measure 37
Other Resources