The leaders of four neighborhood associations were seated in the dim fluorescent light of a church classroom. Photocopied pages headlined "General Explanation of the City Council Hearings Process" lay piled on lacy tablecloths. This was the meeting to strategize Keep Colwood Green's assault on City Hall.
On September 17th, City Council will hear public testimony about whether to allow the rezone of the 140-acre Colwood Golf Course in NE Cully neighborhood from open space to light industrial. The golf course owners say it could bring jobs to the neighborhood and offer to convert some of the acerage into a public park. The neighborhood leaders don't want to see their precious green space turned to pavement and hope the city Parks Commission will buy out the property and turn it entirely into a park.
Back in May, the city's planning bureau heard the heated debate over the rezone. The hearings office eventually ruled against the rezone, saying both that the Slough section is a "unique, practically irreplaceable asset" to the city and that the essentially political decision (industry vs. open space) should be left up to City Council. Neighbors see the hearings board rejection of the rezone as a major victory and proof that there's a solid chance the Council might swing their way, too.
But how to convince them? Bill Barber, of Central Northeast Neighbors, and Tony Fuentes, of Concordia Neighborhood Association, shoot ideas back and forth across the room. What's more effective - petition or letter? Email or handwritten note? "I think everybody in this room should get 10 people to testify," says Fuentes, "I will be disappointed if we don't get 200 pieces of testimony. I will be happy if we get 500." Maybe they could set up an info table outside the nearby New Seasons? "We'll have to rock-paper-scissors Street Roots for space," laughs one woman. The neighbors aren't digging the 22-acre "compromise park" that's promised along the environmentally-sensitive Columbia Slough if the area is rezoned. Neighbors don't use the private golf course as a frisbee-playing, dog-walking park (except illegally after hours sometimes), but see big possibilities if all the land could come into public hands. "It has such potential to be a regional park," says NE resident Nancy Hatch, "It's not a neighborhood park, but a regional asset."
More on the debate plus some hot rezone pix below the cut.
Here's what the space looks like now - that's the possibly-expanding airport at the top and the Columbia Slough running through the middle:

And the planned rezone (yellow space = light industrial, green = park):

Fuentes says the donated park is in the required environmental setback area along the Columbia - industry couldn't build on the area anyway. He thinks the industrial rezone would be a big step backward for Portland. "The comprehensive plan does not support it, the goals of the neighborhood do not support it, the local infrastructure can't support it," Fuentes says, "But, as happens in Portland, there's always the potential that some kind of compromise will be pulled out of someone's ass."
Mike Lindberg, a former Parks Commissioner who recently signed on as a consultant for the golf course owners, sees it differently. "My thinking is: give Cully the park they deserve," says Lindberg, who points out that the conversion to industrial could create jobs while still preserving the most environmentally important part of the golf course. "I very rarely get involved with lobbying," he says, "unless I believe there is a win-win situation for the City."
Showing 1-10 of 10
The Cully-Parkrose area is extremely deficient in parkland, natural areas, and other open space access (see the Parks Bureau Vision 2020 Plan).
Cully's access rate is 2,780 people per park acre, compared with a citywide average of 40 people per park acre (Daily Journal of Commerce). Given this level of service, it is hard to believe anyone would view this gerrymandered 22 acre offering as giving Cully "the park they deserve."
Losing Colwood by amending and ultimately undermining the vision and mission of Portland's Comprehensive Plan means that the last significant open space in the neighborhood disappears. And the opportunity to ever address Cully's deficiency of parkland disappears with it.
Let’s not kid ourselves – this is all about $$$. And while I have no issue with a property owner getting the most out of their land and don't necessarily feel like they have some high moral obligation that should over-ride economic reality, what will we taxpayers be left with once they 'cash out' and leave us to foot the bill for making the land live up to it's zoning?
Above all else, I believe that the taxpayer costs of developing the infrastructure (utilities and roads) required to support light industrial development on a golf course will be WAY above any potential return on investment (can you say ‘tram’?) even if hundreds of new jobs are created! And what about the increased traffic and resulting pollution in an area already gasping for breath (and quiet!)
Since any way it goes we taxpayers will end up eating the substantial costs, I suspect the wiser (and cheaper over all) investment would be for the city to buy the land at a compromise price somewhere between the value of open space and light industrial space and then turn it into a combination of revenue-producing and free recreational space. That gets the property owner a “reasonable” return and keeps Colwood green.
And then let's set our 'light industrial' and job development sights on all that blighted (and already zoned) commercial property along and adjacent to Columbia Blvd between 82nd and MLK! THAT'S where the 'win-win' solution really is!
Spatial Equity is very important; the numbers Fuentes cites above show that this open space absolutely cannot be converted from park space into industrial.
Hello people, the golf course is not a park. It is not open space. It isn't public. It's a private club where you have to pay $30 to enjoy it and you have to play golf. That is the exactly opposite of spatial equity.
Tax payers never purchased the land and haven't paid to maintain it for the last 90 years. Just because some neighbors have been trespassing on the lawns for 50 years doesn't mean the property automatically reverts to a park. (or perhaps that's a good rule that should apply to all those nice double lots in Cully)
Colwood is zoned Open Space with an environmental conservation overlay. Prior to annexation into the city, Colwood was zoned as an agricultural district by Multnomah County.
No maintenance has been done by anyone to support industrial development at this site. One of the many reasons why the Hearings Officer has recommended against the rezoning is that local infrastructure cannot support it.
As for the opportunity to change this area into a park, it is not so far-fetched. There are a variety of possible funding sources for acquisition including Metro’s Natural Areas Bond, the City's parks system development charges, and state grants. These funds may only be used for park and open space acquisition and do not affect the funding of other pressing needs in Portland.
"No maintenance has been done by anyone to support industrial development at this site."
Actually, it's smack dab in the middle of an industrial sanctuary, which has been planned, funded, maintained, and developed expressly for industrial uses, so you could make the argument that reserving the land for anything other than industrial uses is completely inconsistent with the City's own planning of that area...
The area is zoned Open Space now and has always been zoned Open Space. Retaining the Open Space zoning is consistent with what this property has always been and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Hearings Officer's recommendation that Colwood retain the zoning was based no his assessment that it better serves the goals, policies and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan to have the area remain Open Space than have it become industrial.
I can appreciate your argument, the position of those opposed to the rezone proposal and the Hearings Officer is that retention of on this site as Open Space is consistent with the City's planning goals.
Ultimately, viewing Colwood's proximity to industrial land as the primary reason to rezone is no better than insisting that land adjacent to Colwood be rezoned open space due to proximity to Colwood.
"Ultimately, viewing Colwood's proximity to industrial land as the primary reason to rezone is no better than insisting that land adjacent to Colwood be rezoned open space due to proximity to Colwood."
That is some twisted logic there, Tony. You wouldn't have to do anything to turn a golf course into a park, but to turn an active industrial area into a park would require massive capital expenditures to remove infrastructure, and would put thousands of people out of work. I don't see very many similarities.
"Ultimately, viewing Colwood's proximity to industrial land as the primary reason to rezone is no better than insisting that land adjacent to Colwood be rezoned open space due to proximity to Colwood."
That is some twisted logic there, Tony. You wouldn't have to do anything to turn a golf course into a park, but to turn an active industrial area into a park would require massive capital expenditures to remove infrastructure, and would put thousands of people out of work. I don't see very many similarities.
GLV, without a doubt redeveloping an industrial area into a park takes some work but it does happen - consider Gasworks park in Seattle. In fact converting former industrial areas to parks is an area of focus for the Trust for Public Land.
However, I was just trying to illustrate a point not necessarily advocate the rezoning of industrial areas to open space.
As I noted earlier, Colwood is presently zoned Open Space and has always been zoned Open Space. There is no need for remediation to convert Colwood into a park that will serve Cully's 14,000 residents (who presenting have a single five acre park to call their own). And I have no doubt that a Colwood Park would be enjoyed by people through-out Portland.
Comments (10) RSS