League of Women Voters of Portland, November, 1972
The Columbia Slough: A League Action Program to Rescue a Waterway
Location
The Columbia Slough at one time was a navigable waterway running parallel with the Columbia River, north of Portland. Its source was the Columbia River near Blue Lake Park. Its mouth was the Willamette River near St. Johns. The first log raft was formed in the Slough in 1852. During the 1890’s low-powered sternwheelers would use the Slough when travelling upstream to the Dalles during high water, coming back with the current in the Columbia River Channel.
Upper Slough Last to Development
Lying as it does in a flood plain which hugs a bluff, the Slough has always served as a natural drainageway for north Portland and northeast Multnomah county. About the time of the first World War, property owners of land near the present airport asked the Corps of Engineers to dam the upper half of the Slough so they could farm the reclaimed rich bottom land. This damming was bitterly fought by businessmen on the Slough and by the City of Portland who claimed that not only would closing the lower Slough block a navigable stream, but that resulting lack of current would allow the lower Slough to stagnate. Developers and farmers prevailed. The Slough was cut off from its Columbia River source and dammed near 18th Avenue.
Since that time, 1919, the upper Columbia Slough has disintegrated into brackish, algae-ridden backwaters, used mostly for drainage ditches. Some stretches of the Upper Slough are still visible at Broadmoor, Riverside and Colwood golf courses.
Life and Near Death of the Lower Columbia Slough
The lower Slough, slow-moving to begin with, became even more lethargic with the loss of current from the Columbia River. However, in spite of this, it survived as a waterway used for commerce, pleasure boating, fishing and houseboating until 1949 when industry and the citizens of Portland almost killed it by using the Slough as an open sewer into which was poured untreated sewage, wood waste, packing house offal, and hog ranch wastes. Toward the end, in 1949 and 1950, the Slough was so foul that shingle mill workers refused to handle logs out of the Slough. The shingle mills moved away. Gradually, the houseboaters, fishermen and boaters left too.
Convalescence of a Waterway
Water pollution clean-up began in 1951 with the opening of Portland’s primary treatment plant. Soon the City will open a secondary treatment plant. Industry on the Slough has been hooked up to the sewer system since 1971. Permits are required by the Department of Environmental Quailty for organic, inorganic, and warm waste water discharges into the Slough. Soon, some polluting substances will be dredged out of the Slough.
Recovery of water quality has been remarkable. Not only can the public now safely boat and fish in the Slough, but swimming is possible at rare intervals. Before the Slough can be used at all times for boating, fishing and primary contact sports, however, certain problems must be solved.
Prescription for Recovery
1. A source of water for the Slough should be found so that water level and quality does not depend on rainwater and drainage.
2. 60 years’ accumulation of sewage, industrial and packing house wastes should be removed from the Slough bed. Some estimates place this at 2 to 15 feet of waste.
3. Snags should be removed from the Slough, and depth made uniform.
4. An alternative must be found to the present practice of dumping untreated sewage into the slough during stormy weather. When Portland’s drainage system was built storm and sanitary sewer lines were combined into one system. The sewage treatment plant is designed to handle a certain million gallons of sewage a day. On extremely rainy days, the treatment plant cannot handle all the liquid which pours through the lines, so a certain amount of untreated waste is shunted past the treatment plant into the Slough. Luckily, this dumping occurs during the time when there is little activity in the Slough.
5. Run-off must be dealt with. As rain falls, it seeks its own level and winds up in that natural drainageway, the Slough. On its way to the Slough, rainwater picks up bacteria-laden seepage from cesspools and septic fields; nitrate-rich effluent from city lawns, from farms and feed lots; and, chemical and petroleum wastes from industries, service stations, parking lots, streets, freeways and the airport.
Another Threat to the Slough
The foregoing, in capsule form, is progress which the citizens of Portland have made in cleaning up the lower Columbia Slough, and the problems which remain to be solved before the Slough will be safe for primary contact sports. Now there is another threat to the Slough, from another quarter. That threat is industrialization by the biggest developer in the state of Oregon, the Port of Portland.
The Port of Portland and Its Purpose
The Port of Portland is a municipality, chartered by the state of Oregon in 1891. Its purpose is the promotion of maritime, marine, aviation, commercial and industrial development. As a municipality, it has rights of condemnation within all of Multnomah County, a tax base of 85 cents per $1,000 assessed valuation, and right to review building permits issued to people near the airport.
The citizens of Portland and Multnomah County have no voice in Port affairs. Port policy is made by a nine-man commission, appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate. Port policy is administered by an executive director who serves at the pleasure of the commission.
A Spur to Land Development
In the 1960s, certain technological advances were made which touched the imaginations of those connected with land development. The first advance was flood control in the lower Columbia by a series of dams in the upper Columbia River system which eliminated the 30-foot spring pumping sand from river channels, enabling inland cities to bring ocean-going ships to inland port facilities. Maintenance of 40-foot ship channels required a place to deposit dredge spoil. Combining excess dredge spoil with a diminished flood threat meant that flood plain development was more attractive. It was about this time that ideas for Rivergate Industrial Park and the expanded Portland International Airport were conceived.
Port Acquires Land and Makes Plans
In 1965, the Port of Portland owned about 600 acres near St. Johns. As a result of a seminar, sponsored by the Port and panelled by members of the Urban Land Institute, the Port decided to acquire and develop the flood plain lying north of the Columbia Slough, near the confluence of the Willamette and Columbia rivers. After various land acquisitions, including the Leadbetter estate which was controlled by the Willamette University Trust Funds, the Port commissioned a land use study from Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall (called DimJim). Purpose of the study was to come up with a plan for development not only of the Port’s 2932 acres, but of adjacent private and public lands as well. Though this plan has been called a joint effort of the Port, the City, and the County, in reality the Port paid the bill and the City and County provided limited manpower.
A Plan for Development
The Rivergate and North Portland Peninsula Plan, shortened to DMJM, was a forward-looking plan for its time, 1967. It attempted to balance industrial, commercial and recreational uses for the lands the consultants studied.
The DMJM Plan called for an industrial complex employing 25,000 people. Industry needing deep-draft shipping would be located on the outer rim of the industrial park, fronting on the Columbia and Willamette rivers. Other industries would locate in the peninsula interior. Smith and Bybee lakes would be deepened for hydroplane, sail and motor boating. Motels, restaurants and a convention center would be developed between the lakes. A park would be located at Kelley Point.
Two absolutes were built into this Plan. Two freeways were necessary to move the people and goods in and out of the area. The consultants emphasized that Rivergate could not achieve its ultimate growth unless Rivergate (north-south) and Whitaker (east-west) freeways were built. The other absolute was of Columbia Slough.
Why Close the Slough
Closure of the Slough would benefit the Port in two ways. In the Plan, the Slough would be nothing but a culverted ditch to drain run-off from adjacent lands. A Slough run through culverts would be more cheaply paved over to provide roads and rail service than would a navigable stream which would require bridges. Closure of the Slough would lessen flood threats. The Port could develop its flood plain lands without landfilling all of it above flood stage. This would insure that industrial land would be cheap industrial land.
An Unfulfilled Plan
The Plan found favor with its sponsor, the Port, and with Multnomah County and the 1969 State legislature. In 1969, however, the Port suffered its first setback when the Corps of Engineers refused permission to the Port to close the Slough. Since then, opposition to the Port has been mounting. First to organize were the property owners along the Slough who protested closure of the Slough to navigation. Next were various environmental groups protesting loss of wildlife habitat. Then came the groups opposing the proliferation of urban freeways. And now the Port’s own neighbors are complaining about the ill-effects of Rivergate development on the traffic and housing in North Portland.
The Plan Breaks Down
Cause of discontent is the different public [?] between 1967 and 1972. The consultants who devised the 1967 DMJM Plan were not working in a vacuum. They were part of a society which still regarded that freeways were symbols of growth. The consultants warned the port that freeways were a necessary element of Rivergate development. The consultants were not prophets. They could not look five years into the future and see that “growth” and “freeway” would be fighting words.
Piecemeal Development Creates Traffic Problems
For the past five years, the Port has been proceeding with industrial development according to the DMJM Plan. Now they need the freeways and there may not be any. Not only is future development stalemated. The limited industrial area already at Rivergate has enticed industrial traffic and workers into the North Portland area. Trucks need to get to Rivergate from the I-5 freeway; to Swan Island and Rivergate. These trucks are using local arterials intended for light traffic. From time to time, they ignore speed limits, traffic lights and truck routes, and even use residential streets.
Industrial Development Adds to Social Problems
Housing has not been planned. Multi-family, barrack-like structures have proliferated even into areas of single-family residences, this in addition to the “temporary” housing left over from World War II shipyard days. Many of these multi-family units are built right up against busy arterials used by trucks, with no play area for the children except the parking lots. No parks, schools, libraries, or medical facilities were brought into the community to handle increased industry and population. Rivergate is a service-demanding facility, and North Portland citizens are being asked to pay for the services.
Is Industrial Growth Worth the Cost
We stand at a crossroads now. As citizens of this community, we should ask ourselves
1) do we want more industry in Portland? If we do, who will pay for the demands industry makes on the community? Should the citizens of North Portland be the only ones to pay for industrial growth? Should the costs of schools, parks, libraries, medical facilities, etc. be paid by the industrial developer, and these charges built into the price of the industrial land?
2) if we decide we want more industry, do we need to industrialize our flood plain and wetlands? There is waterfront land available in the Portland area, much of it controlled by the Port of Portland. CRAG (Columbia Region Association of Governments) claims that there is 2 to 3 times too much industrial land allotted in land use plan, and is re-evaluating industrial needs. Should we wait for the result of this re-evaluation before we proceed with industrialization of the flood plan?
3) if we need industry, and if North Portland does prove to be the place to put it, do we need freeways? Could the Port design a street system to handle Rivergate industrial traffic, and arrange for busses to carry employees in and out of the area, from park and ride stations?
4) if we need the Rivergate Industrial Park, do we need to sacrifice the Slough? Do we have assurances that a “closed” Slough would be maintained as a recreational waterway safe enough for swimming? When would the recreation facilities be built? Before the industrial development, or thirty years in the future?
Another Plan
A new Land Use Plan is being developed by the Columbia Slough Environmental Improvement Task Force, for the flood plain north of the Slough, and west of North Portland Road, as well as for the lower Columbia Slough, and Smith and Bybee lakes. This plan is bogged down in conference.
Yet another plan is being undertaken by citizens of the North Portland area, to offer their plan to the city for the way they want their community to develop. Some preliminary citizens’ plan should be ready by February.
If you think that this whole problem of closing navigable streams, industrializing wet lands, and building more freeways is too big to be settled without a thorough study of the problems raised in this article, would you call or write the members of the Task Force who are in charge of developing this land use plan.
Charman Mel Gordon Multnomah County Comissioner
Lloyd Anderson City Comissioner
L. B. Day Department of Environmental Quality
Colonel Paul Triem U. S. Corps of Engineers
Ed Whelan Port of Portland Comission
If your organization would like a speaker to explain fully all the ramifications of the Rivergate development, contact
The League of Women Voters of Portland
732 S. W. 3rd
Portland, Oregon 97204 Phone 228-1675
