CITY OF PORTLAND
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
(NOT FOR MAILING)

July 25, 1975
From Jamie Hart

To Commissioner Schwab

Addressed to
Subject Columbia Slough Flood Control Project

The study of the Columbia Sough began in 1966 with the DMJM plan for Rivergate and the North Portland Peninsula sponsored by the Port of Portland, the city and the county. From 1968-69, the Corps of Engineers completed recognizance studies of the Rivergate/North Portland Area, but suspended work until a separate study was completed by a special task force made up of members of the North Portland Peninsula Study in December of 1972 and recommended the closure of Columbia Slough for flood control and the development of the banks of the slough and Smith and Bybee Lakes for recreation. The work of the task force was adopted by the Port. The Corps of Engineers then began detailed recreational development which were presented at a public hearing on June 19, 1974. At that hearing, representatives of the city, the Port and the county presented position papers. All three of the agencies gave public support to Plan 1 as proposed by the Corps of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers has completed its report on the project and has selected Plan #1 as the proposed action.

Proposed Action
For purposes of discussion, the slough has been divided into the lower slough and the upper slough. The lower slough is the western end from Kelly Point Park to the Peninsula Drainage Canal. The upper slough is that area encompassed by the Multnomah County Drainage District. Essentially, the upper features of this proposed action are flood control, recreational development, and cultivation of fish and wildlife.

The primary element in the proposed action is the closure of Columbia Slough at its juncture with the Willamette River just south of Kelly Point Park. The closure would necessitate a 170,000 GPM capacity pumping plant which would be provided at the closure site so that interior drainage could be evacuated during high stages in the Willamette River. In addition, the three gaps in the Port of Portland’s landfill would be closed by the Bonneville Way Levee, the North Portland Harbor Levee Flood Wall, and a closure embankment in the Columbia Slough. In addition, modifications to existing flood control facilities would be made in three drainage districts. The sewer outfalls and the levee flood wall of the Peninsula Drainage District #1 would be closed off, and part of the levee of the Peninsula Drainage District #2 along Marine Drive would be reinforced. Levees along the Columbia Slough in three drainage districts would not then be reinforced because high flood stages would not occur in the slough.

Under this plan, continuation of boat traffic and future construction of the authorized 1950 navigation project for the slough would not be possible, because the closure embankment would prevent navigation access to Columbia Slough from the Willamette River.

However, the recreation plans for both the lower and upper slough feature an extensive trail and greenway system. The North Bank Greenway would be up to 150 feet wide with a bicycle and hiking trail. The separation between the trails will eliminate conflicts between those different kinds of recreational use. The south shore of the Columbia Slough will remain in a natural state rather than being the site of docks because no navigation development will be allowed under the plan. A staging area with parking and sanitary facilities would be located at the north end of the Peninsula Drainage Canal and boat ramps would be provided at each of the slough.

Because the water levels of the slough and the Smith and Bybee Lakes could easily be controlled, the plan would provide high fish and wildlife benefits. A warm-water fishery could be provided in the Columbia Slough and Smith and Bybee Lakes would be stocked with fish. Dredging would provide sufficient water depth for fish and islands in the lake for wildlife.

The plan for recreational development along the upper Columbia Slough within the Multnomah County Drainage District #1 could be undertaken independent of that development for the lower slough. As in the lower slough, a 150 foot wide greenway, including a bicycle and hiking trail would be provided through predominantly agricultural, a 50 foot wide greenway would serve as an equestrian trail. Four staging areas would be constructed. One at the foot of the upper Columbia Slough (Peninsula Drainage Canal), one at 142nd Avenue, one connecting Marine Drive and the slough and another near the proposed route of the I-205 Freeway. (N.E. 102nd.) The staging area at the foot of the upper Columbia Slough would provide access to a continuous trail and would have sanitary, boat launching and picnicking facilities.

In summary, the plans for the lower Columbia Slough include the construction of a levee along Bonneville Way (7/10’s of a mile), the construction of a levee and a 250 foot flood wall along North Portland Harbor (7/10’s of a mile) and the construction of a closure embankment near the lower mouth of the Columbia Slough. These items together with a landfill constructed by the Port of Portland form a perimeter levee system surrounding the North Portland Peninsula Area.

Planned recreation and wildlife features will require the acquisition of Smith and Bybee Lakes totaling 1,120 acres, the construction wildlife islands in both of those lakes which handle dredging spoils, the acquisition of 164 acres of land along both banks of the lower Columbia Slough for the greenway, Canal, and the acquisition of a wildlife buffer strip of 308 acres around Smith and Bybee Lakes.

Costs (See D-78 and following draft survey report)

The total cost for the entire project–flood control, recreation and wildlife element,–is $13,732,000. Of this, the federal share is $6,700,000 and the non-federal share is $13,732,000. In addition the annual maintenance cost for the project is $1,242,500. Of which $824,800 is the non-federal share. The responsibility for the non-federal costs rests with the sponsor. The Port of Portland stated at its June, 1974 meeting that it was willing to sponsor the project providing that full cooperation and financial assistance of other responsible agencies would be forthcoming. The sponsorship of the recreational aspects of the plan currently are being sought from Multnomah County, the City of Portland and the Port. Formal sponsorship has not been finalized at this date, however. Finalization of the local sponsor cooperative agreement will occur prior to the filing of the EIS with the Council on environmental quality.

The local sponsor will be required to 1) provide without cost to the U.S. all lands, easements and rights-of-way for the construction of the project ($261,000). 2) accomplish without cost to the U.S. all alterations and relocations of buildings, streets, storm drains, utilities and other structures and improvements made necessary by the construction ($100,000). 3) maintain prescribed by the Army. 4) for recreational development and fish and wildlife enhancement, provide fee title to all lands other than access roads needed for recreational development and fish and wildlife enhancement required to appraised value of land as provided amounts to less than 50 percent of the total first cost of the recreational development and fish and wildlife enhancement. The Port must make additional contributions sufficient to bring the non-federal share to at least that level (50 percent). Those additional contributions may consist of the actual cost of carrying out an agreed upon portion of the development, a cash contribution or a combination of both. Finally, the local sponsor must operate, maintain and replace without expense to the Federal Government, the recreational, fish and wildlife areas and all facilities installed pursuant to the agreement.

Planned Benefits

Flood control benefits produced by the selected plans would include reduction of existing and future flood damages to Peninsula Drainage District #1 and #2, the Suttle Road area, and areas south of the lower Columbia Slough. The plan would accomplish enhancement of the presently unprotected lands in the North Portland Peninsula area and the reduction of damages from the ponding of interior runoff in the Multnomah Drainage District. Flood control and interior drainage benefits of the plan would be distributed widely over a large number of ownerships within three drainage districts and portions of the North Portland Peninsula area. Recreation opportunities afforded by the upper Columbia Slough Recreational Plan would provide for both trail based activities and other activities within four staging areas. Finally, the opportunity for the development of fish and wildlife is created by the water level control afforded by the levees of the selected plan.

Other Alternatives

The principle difference among the structural alternatives for the Columbia Slough is the provision for navigation along the lower Columbia Slough. In looking at the various alternatives, the Corps of Engineers established a criteria as follows: The plan must be 1) a plan which maximizes contributions to the national economic development and 2) a plan which maximizes contribution to the national environmental quality.

Plan #3 (Columbia Slough Levees) would provide flood protection for the Peninsula Drainage District #1 and #2 and for the North Portland Peninsula area plus preservation of the opportunity for future navigation development in the lower Columbia Slough. New plans would be to close the gaps at each end of the Port of Portland’s landfill by the Bonneville Way Levee and the North Portland Harbor Levee flood wall. However, under this plan continuation for Columbia Slough would be possible because there would water access to the Columbia Slough from the Willamette River. To achieve its plan for industrial development, the Port of Portland would be required to construct low, movable or high fixed bridges across the slough at one railroad and two roadway locations so that potential future navigation traffic on the channel might pass and that rail and vehicular traffic might cross the slough A trail and greenway would be provided along the lower Columbia Slough and Plan #3 would cost $25,141,000. Annual costs for the operation of the project would be $1,942,100 with annual benefits of $1,788,500.

Plan #7 combines plan #3 and plan #4 by combining the construction of the Columbia Slough levees and the opening of the Peninsula Drainage Canal to connect the Willamette River and Columbia River in one continuous open waterway along the full length of the slough. As in plan #3, the gaps at each end of the Port of Portland’s landfill would be closed by the Bonneville Way Levee and the North Portland Levee flood wall. The existing plugs at either end of the Peninsula Drainage Canal would be removed. Under authorized 1950 Navigation Project for the slough would be possible because there would water access to the Columbia Slough from the Willamette River at both ends of the slough. An extensive trail and greenway system would be provided under this alternative as well as the provision of many fish and wildlife benefits. However, a water game fishery could not be provided in the slough because there would opportunity for invasion by rough fish. Only the lakes could be stocked. Cost of plan #7 is $29,453,000 of which $17,938 is federal and $11,515 is non-federal. Annual cost for this alternative are $2,240,300. Annual benefits will be $1,805,200.

It should be noted that the benefits on the last two alternatives are based on flood damages and losses which are prevented, benefits on return on investment for lands protected, navigation benefits for savings from moving certain commodities by water on the slough and recreational benefits.

Plan #1 is endorsed by CRAG, the county, the Port, Portland City Engineer, the Bureau of Planning, Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Wildlife Commission, League of Women Voters, Peninsula Drainage District #2 and several individuals. Opposing plan #1 and supporting navigation on the Columbia Slough are the Columbia Slough Development Corporation (20 industrial and other property owners), the Oregon State Marine Board, NPCC, the Washington Environmental Council and several individuals.

The Army Corps of Engineers says that no sponsor could be found during the past 25 years for navigational development of the slough.