PDA

View Full Version : Clark County ordered to restore protection for 2,500 acres of farmland


Chief
05-16-2008, 11:32 AM
http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/05/clark_county_ordered_to_restor.html

Posted by Allan Brettman,
The Oregonian
May 15, 2008 14:30PM

VANCOUVER -- A state board has ordered Clark County to restore protection for 2,500 acres of farm land that was marked for development under last year's sweeping growth management plan.

The Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board cut by more than half the amount of land the county wanted to convert from agricultural use to development. The order was issued Wednesday.

The board also ruled the county's public
participation process was inadequate and often unfair. But the panel stopped short of ordering the county to start the whole process over.

"We are very pleased that 2,500 acres of farmland is going to be protected from sprawling development," said April Putney, political director for Futurewise, a Seattle-based environmental organization.

The growth plan county commissioners approved last September would have taken about 4,000 acres zoned for farmland use and made it available for development. That's about 11 percent of all of the county's farmland.

Futurewise and the Clark County Natural Resource Council, led by Vancouver attorney John Karpinski, challenged the growth plan and the process the county used to achieve it.

Both organizations contended the county did not need to overhaul its growth plan, noting that a previous plan had been approved only two years earlier. However, a different set of county commissioners was in place when the previous plan was approved in 2006.

-- Allan Brettman: allanbrettman@news.oregonian.com


Anyone, including the local rag, who count John Karpinski as a has-been need to think again...

So what does this really mean?? Back to the drawing board and do it all again from scratch??

Where's April from Futurwise when you need her??!!

April
05-19-2008, 03:26 PM
Ask and I shall reply. Sorry I've been somewhat disengaged lately, I haven't been able to check in often as before.

The County has a November 12, 2008 deadline to bring itself into compliance with GMA by removing the 2500 acres of farmland from its recently expanded UGA. So the County will have to go through another public comment period to do this, although it can be somewhat more expedited since the ruling was pretty direct and clear as to which parcels were illegally de-designated. As the article pointed out, it looks like the BoCC is planning on appealing the decision to the Superior Court (either Clark or Thurston). Even if they do appeal, unless the County seeks and is granted a stay, they'd still have to hit the compliance deadline.

Answer your questions? Or did that just create new ones? Let me know.

Chief
05-19-2008, 07:00 PM
That's as clear as it can be under the circumstances. I guess we'll need to keep an eye on the Superior Court for the next chapter of this saga...

Thanks for the debrief April...

mrgrn

Waterbuffalo
05-20-2008, 01:12 AM
Thanks April.. As one can repeat.. Developing..