Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Comprehensive Plan Coastal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clatsop County staff propose modernized Goals 16–18 for estuaries, shorelands and beaches; commissioners ask staff to mark state mandates
Summary
David Cook, Clatsop County senior planner, and Garrett Phillips of CREST presented proposed comprehensive‑plan updates to Goals 16–18 that condense repetitive policy language, incorporate state guidance and add policy language addressing dredging, cable landings and sea‑level scenarios.
David Cook, Clatsop County senior planner, and Garrett Phillips of the Columbia River Estuary Study Task Force (CREST) presented proposed updates to the county comprehensive plan’s Goals 16, 17 and 18 at a board work session, saying the three coastal goals had not seen a meaningful update in about 30 years and require consolidation and alignment with recent state guidance.
The update matters because Goals 16–18 govern estuaries, shorelands and beaches — areas that affect ecological function, public access, water‑dependent development and coastal hazard planning across Clatsop County.
Cook told commissioners that Goal 16 covers the county’s three major estuaries (Columbia, Netarts Bay [Mechanicum in packet], and Ecola Creek) and policies for aquatic activities; Goal 17 covers coastal shorelands, wetlands and public access; and Goal 18 covers beaches and dunes, including beach erosion and protective structures. He said staff began the project in December 2023, have held multiple public and technical advisory meetings, and prepared a large table summary of proposed policy changes included in the agenda packet for board review.
Garrett Phillips described the nature of the amendments: consolidating repeated policies (the current documents repeat similar language for each estuary), folding prior ordinances into the goals, and updating policies to reflect new state laws and guidance. Proposed topic areas include dredging and dredge‑material disposal, public access policies, mitigation for estuarine impacts, cable landings, beachfront protective structures, geologic hazard reporting and explicit consideration of future weather and water‑level scenarios in applicant submissions.
Cook said the draft table (attachment A in the agenda packet) explains where each proposed policy would live (goal 16, 17 or 18), how it differs from existing text and why staff proposes the change. He asked the board either to comment on specific policies in the table or to give higher‑level guidance on topic areas; staff plan to incorporate feedback into a revised draft to go to the Planning Commission in June and return to the board at the April 23 work session.
Commissioner Banks urged caution about adding new county requirements beyond state and federal mandates and asked staff to use permissive language (“may”) for discretionary items and clearly mark any local policies that exceed state or federal requirements. Cook agreed to identify the policies that are state/federal requirements and to flag any discretionary policies staff recommends remain as “shall.” Commissioner Webb noted the complexity of coastal land‑use law in Oregon and supported staff and CREST taking the lead in navigating technical issues; he asked for patience given the unusual estuary and river‑mouth conditions in the county.
No formal adoption occurred at the work session. Staff will return with a revised draft that explicitly annotates which provisions are tied to state or federal requirements and the rationale for retaining any stronger local language.
