Port of Portland Letter re: Vancouver
March 10, 2000
Mr. Paul Shirey
Port of Portland
Box 3529
Portland, Oregon 97208
Dear Mr. Shirey,
As advocates representing conservation interests in both Portland and Vancouver, it is our position that Parcel 3 located on land owned by the Port of Vancouver in the Vancouver Lake Lowlands is a viable alternative site for the activities currently being planned for West Hayden Island by the Port of Portland. We request that the Port of Portland consider the Vancouver, Washington site as a legitimate alternative to the proposed West Hayden Island development.
We believe that the Parcel 3 site would meet the economic needs of the region, would satisfy the specifications of this particular project, and would constitute a less environmentally damaging alternative. As conservationists, we all recognize that West Hayden Island represents a natural resource of regional significance. The significance of this habitat was also established in the 1987 City of Portland Goal 5 Inventory, the 1992 Greenspaces Masterplan, and the Port of Portland’s 1999 Goal 5 analysis. The City of Portland Goal 5 Inventory states, West Hayden Island “is an area of large structural diversity and provides both present and potential wildlife habitat of high quality within an urban center.” It noted specifically West Hayden Island’s size, diverse wetlands, meadows and cottonwood/ ash forest habitats, and the high potential for interspersion of wildlife between it and other adjacent wildlife areas. West Hayden Island scored second (99 out of a potential 100) in habitat inventory for the Columbia Corridor. The Port of Portland Goal 5 analysis notes that this site contains 4% of the remaining cottonwood/ ash forest habitat remaining between Columbia River mile 12 and river mile 145. The Corp of Engineers has identified this habitat as the most critical habitat to target for preservation. We believe that the establishment of marine facilities on West Hayden Island is incompatible with the preservation and protection of this valuable resource.
In comparison, the Port of Vancouver Parcel 3 site is of significantly lower fish and wildlife habitat value. While there are a few small wetlands and a narrow strip of cottonwoods located at this site, the majority of the area has for years been used as pastureland. Furthermore, this site would not necessitate the construction of automobile or railroad bridges and thus eliminates many of the concerns surrounding potential impacts to endangered salmonid species. It also is a site that is bordered on the east by already developed industrial land uses and the west by the Vancouver Lake flushing channel and thus would not unduly undermine the integrity of surrounding habitat. Finally, we believe that this site better addresses many “quality of life issues” that would be exacerbated by building this project on West Hayden Island. Specifically, it targets new jobs to Clark County where they are most needed, and it reduces traffic impacts at the Janzen Beach, Marine Drive, I-5 interchange area.
On January 21, 2000 representatives of the Audubon Society of Portland, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Marine Fisheries Service met with Chris Wamsley and Walt Morely of the Port of Vancouver to discuss the possibility of relocating the West Hayden Island Development to the Parcel 3 site. At this meeting it was determined that contrary to the “Summary of Comparison of Alternative Sites to Site Selection Criteria” recently distributed by the Port of Portland, the Parcel 3 site in Vancouver does meet all but one of the listed site selection criteria.
The Port of Portland alternative site summary states that the Parcel 3 site is too small, does not have available industry support services, lacks access to Class 1 rail service, and is unavailable for this particular project. In fact at an estimated 600 acres (after wetland mitigation) the site is more than adequate to house the entire three-phase WHI project. Industry support services are already available and will be augmented in the near future. The Port of Vancouver is already planning to install a loop track for a unit train at this site. Finally, the Port of Vancouver expressed not only a strong interest in this particular project, but also expressed a willingness to at least consider entering into discussions with the Port of Portland about a collaborative effort. The timeline for the development of this parcel is similar to the timeline proposed by the Port of Portland for the development of West Hayden Island.
The one criterion listed by the Port of Portland that the Parcel 3 site does not meet is that it is not located within the Portland Urban Growth Boundary. However, if this is a limiting factor, we have to question why 9 out of 17 sites examined by the Port of Portland as possible alternative sites were also located outside the Portland UGB. We also have to note that both on the Port of Portland web site and in a newsletter distributed to the general public, the Port of Portland dismisses Washington sites not because they are located outside the Portland UGB, but rather because they are located too far from Portland and because they lack adequate size for this facility. As we have already stated, neither of these limiting factors is applicable to the Vancouver site. While we of course would not want to see a facility such as this located outside of an urban growth boundary, we see no reason why it could not be located within the urban growth boundary of Vancouver rather than that of Portland. This is a facility that is meant to serve the interests of the region, not one specific municipality.
The Ports of Portland and Vancouver have on many public occasions touted their efforts to work together to serve the interests of the region. Yet when pressed on the specific issue of working cooperatively with the Port of Vancouver on this project, Dave Barrows stated that “there have been attempts at limited partnerships, but with heavy duty things the working relationship has not been good (WHI workshop notes-12-20-99).” We believe that given the region’s expanding trade objectives and its dwindling land supply, it is essential that the Ports of Vancouver and Portland work together to maximize the potential of the land at their disposal. In this instance, it is clear to us that this would mean that the two Ports undertake this project cooperatively on Parcel 3, or that the Port of Portland relinquish this project outright to the Port of Vancouver.
The Port of Portland is obligated to explore potential alternative sites for the proposed West Hayden Island development. If an alternative site is located, the Port of Portland is further obligated to take environmental impacts into consideration in making a final site selection. As representatives of conservation interests in both Portland and Vancouver, we unanimously agree that the Port of Vancouver Parcel 3 site provides a better alternative to West Hayden Island. Utilization of this site could meet that economic needs of the region while also preserving a regionally significant, undeveloped greenspace. We strongly encourage the Port of Portland to put the interests of the region above petty squabbling and self-serving competition. We would be pleased to discuss this proposal further with you.
Sincerely,
Bob Sallinger, Director Wildlife Care Center
Audubon Society of Portland
Mike Houck, Urban Naturalist
Audubon Society of Portland
Alison Mielke, Director
Friends of Clark County
Nancy Ellifrit
Vancouver Audubon Society
Cc. Holly Michael (ODFW)
John Marshall, Jennifer Thompson (USFWS)
Ben Meyer, Michelle Day (NMFS)
Lori Warner (DSL)
Judy Linton (USCOE)
Emily Roth (DEQ, Portland Harbor Program)
Ralf Thomas Rogers, Yvonne Vallette (EPA)
Port of Vancouver
West Hayden Island Advisory Committee
Portland City Council
Portland Planning Commission
Clark County Planning Commission
Clark County Board of Commissioners
Columbia River Economic Development Council
Vancouver City Council
Metro Council
Shelly Strom (Portland Business Journal)
Jennifer Bjorus (Oregonian)
Gayla Whitman (HINOON)
