Members of the Clark County Council, including Chair Gary Medvigy, have highlighted rural lands along the Chelatchie-Prairie Railroad as prime locations for future job site development to attract business.
The County Council voted, however, against reissuing a work order to draft development regulations for the areas, last week, however, delaying the plan once more.
The county-owned Chelatchie-Prairie Railroad, which runs from Vancouver to Chelatchie, spans 33 miles and passes directly through Yacolt and Battle Ground. The Portland Vancouver Junction Railroad (PVJR) has been the rail’s operator since 2012 and plans to use it to ship aggregate materials from Chelatchie southbound. Lately, the county has considered developing “freight-rail dependent use” (FRDU) areas, zoned for either commercial or industrial use, to provide businesses easier access to the railroad in county rural lands. Medvigy has stated such developments would provide more jobs in Clark County.
Last week, county councilors Sue Marshall, Glen Yung and Karen Bowerman, however, rejected a consultant’s bid to draft development regulations for rail-adjacent job sites. The 3-2 decision halts industrial developments, as these regulations are necessary for future planning.
This decision followed a previous bid rejection, last month. During a June meeting, Medvigy asked that a $99,805 contract with BERK Consulting Inc. be rejected to allow more consultants to bid on the project, as only two companies had shown interest. Under Medvigy’s direction, however, a new scope of work was added to the contract, which led to last week’s rejection.
Under the new contract, the consultant would review Clark County’s 2023-published Vacant Buildable Lands Model (VBLM) to “double-check” the county’s employment capacity. The VBLM analyzes available acres for residential buildings and job sites within the city and urban growth boundary limits. The 2023 model appraised 65,090 acres as buildable lands for employment within city and growth boundary limits in Clark County. Medvigy stated that the purpose was to ensure “the numbers were correct” for projected employment opportunities in the county. However, the VBLM does not pertain to the FRDU, as the former focuses on buildable lands within city limits and growth boundaries, while the latter concerns rural, rail-adjacent lands outside of city limits.
Bowerman, who previously supported hiring a consultant, requested that the contract be changed to review 2024-published VBLM data once the county releases the information before December, as required by the state’s Growth Management Act (GMA). County Manager Kathleen Otto indicated that this decision would necessitate the county republish its projection, delaying its comprehensive plan beyond 2024 and exposing the county to potential litigation. Under state law, the county must publish projections for the next 20 years of residential and employment growth before 2025. After the council decided not to revise the contract, Bowerman joined Marshall and Yung in rejecting the new proposal. Before last week’s council meeting, Marshall anticipated that the new scope of work would “throw the monkey wrench” into the proposal.
“I think what they were attempting to do was not feasible, and, in the end, people voted the way they [did] for differing reasons,” Marshall said after the meeting last week.
In part, Marshall and Yung opposed the FRDU due to the operator’s ongoing legal troubles. The Department of Ecology is investigating PVJR for obstructing water through tributaries to Chelatchie Creek and unauthorized discharges into adjacent wetlands. PVJR is also under investigation for trespassing and damaging county-owned property. Yung expressed concerns about moving the project forward without an economic study on its benefits and PVJR’s ongoing legal concerns.
“Given all that’s taken place [and] given all the uncertainties, given the legal issues involved with it, I just don’t see FRDU as being productive for the county at this time,” Yung said during the meeting.
Marshall, who shares similar concerns with Yung regarding PVJR, worries future operations may impact communities near the railroad, including Brush Prairie and Battle Ground neighborhoods.
“I was never supportive of moving forward with a consultant and developing these regulations because [of] the difficulties the railroad operator is having with compliance with environmental regulations are not settled… It doesn’t make sense to move forward until there is some certainty about whether or not the operator [complies] with our lease agreement and with environmental regulations,” Marshall said following the decision.
Most Popular
Comments / 0