Opinion Piece Explores Oregon Chapter Report

An op-ed appeared January 3, 2003, in The Oregonian of Portland about the findings and recommendations of the Committee on the Oregon Planning Experience (COPE), a special task force established by the Oregon Chapter of APA in the Spring of 2000.

The committee issued its report, "An Evaluation of Planning In Oregon, 1973-2001," to the chapter in November 2001. The committee found that, overall, Oregon's land-use planning program is working well, however an extensive public outreach effort is needed to explain how the program works and what benefits it provides the state.

Author of the guest editorial is Nohad A. Toulan, an AICP Fellow and Dean of the College of Urban and Public Affairs at Portland State University.

New Governor Must Embrace and Nurture Oregon's Land-Use Vision

By Nohad Toulan, FAICP

As he prepares to take the oath of office this month, Gov.-elect Ted Kulongoski will be doing so with keen awareness of the financial problems and challenges facing the state. The budget crisis notwithstanding, he should not ignore the fact that 2003 is a significant anniversary. Senate Bills 100 and 101, adopted in 1973, represent a landmark that needs to be celebrated. In many ways, that legislation and other actions that followed are primarily responsible for the high quality of life that is one of our greatest assets.

Statewide land-use planning reflected the vision and dedication of a governor and legislators who recognized that urban growth and the protection of farmland and other natural resources need not be in conflict with each other. The result has been a planning system that made Oregon the envy of other states, many of which are still struggling to combat and rectify the negative impacts of urban sprawl. Only the most biased of critics will deny that we have done great things in the past 30 years. Our cities and rural areas are more livable, and our infrastructures are more efficient. Planning, however, addresses attitudes and conditions that continue to change, and it is clear that many things have changed since we launched our planning process. Today we stand at a crossroad that requires a thorough examination of how and why we are engaged in statewide planning. Early in 2000, the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association created a committee to assess our experience with state land-use planning since 1972. The Committee on the Oregon Planning Experience, which I headed, included individuals whose contributions to planning in Oregon are highly acclaimed and who brought to the table intimate knowledge of the issues and the challenges facing us. After a year and half of analysis, hearings and statewide interviews with supporters and critics of statewide planning, the committee released a report that is frank but fair. It is an excellent starting point for the new administration.

While some may blame land-use planning for every social and economic problem we have, there is no evidence that Oregonians are dissatisfied with the quality of life that we enjoy as a result of our growth-management efforts. There are, however, several issues that need to be addressed, including streamlining the planning process, developing regional plans and addressing issues of fairness and equity. More important, we need to revisit our vision for the future of the state.

Our planning process started with a vision centered on the protection of farm- and forestlands and evolved to include efficient utilization of urban land. But going forward, that vision needs to be expanded to address broader issues. We need to define the desired pattern of settlements in the state. Today we have a population of slightly more than 3.5 million. Eighty-one percent live in the 13 counties of the Interstate 5 corridor, and 60 percent of those are in the Portland region. This pattern has not changed much in the past 100 years and is not likely to change if left unattended.

What will happen when our population doubles, as it will certainly do in the next few decades? Do we want or are we prepared for a Portland area with a population of 3.5 million not counting Clark County? We need a vision that looks at development opportunities in other regions and for the possibility of encouraging the emergence of healthy regional centers, a vision that is not anti-growth while protecting the economy and the environment. It is not how much we should grow but where and how. We need the institutional infrastructures that can help develop and implement such vision and as part of this, we should explore the expansion of Metro to cover all five counties of the Portland area.

This vision should give our planning process a purpose that is clearly understood and appreciated by a public that values Oregon's livability. It should pave the way for a healthy economic growth not only because we have available industrial sites but also because we know what we want to be and where we are going.

Taking the lead in making this vision a successful reality may be one of the greatest challenges facing Kulongoski and may become his greatest legacy.

Nohad Toulan is dean of the College of Urban and Public Affairs at Portland State University.

Copyright 2003 by The Oregonian