02/05/1992 - Minutes NPO #3 MINUTES
February 5, 1992
1. Before starting our own agenda, we met with NPO #7 to discuss the proposed Community
Commercial Plan Designation and Zoning District.
a. Cal Woolery and Bill Gross gave background of the reasons for the new zoning
designation.
b. Lengthy discussion was held regarding the draft letter from NPO #7 to City Planner
Jerry Offer. Each item was explained and commented on.
c. The two NPO's separated to conduct their individual meetings.
2. N PO #3 meeting called to order at 8:25 P.M.
3. Present: Froude, Garner, Hansen, Helm, Mortensen, Porter.
Absent: Bishop
Pending member: Dana LeMoine
4. Minutes from the January 8, 1992 meeting were approved.
5. NPO #3 continued the discussion of the proposed Community Commercial Plan.
a. A motion was made and seconded to approve all items in the NPO #7 letter WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF THE DISTANCE LIMITATION.
Passed unanimously.
b. NPO #3 feels very strongly that the distance limitation should be changed to at least
ONE MILE from any other type of commercial zone. A motion was made and seconded to this
effect.
Passed unanimously.
5. Robinson Annexation - NPO #3 realizes that we cannot prevent the annexation request
and zone change to City of Tigard R-4.5. We do wish to express our deep regret and
disappointment that this very special piece of Bull Mountain is being divided into such small lots.
For this reason we do not choose to vote on the annexation request.
6. Notices of decisions received were distributed.
7. Other business -
a. A letter from Ron Pomeroy regarding the Schumacher request presented to us at the
January 8 meeting was distributed. We ask that in the future this type of letter be sent to each
member of the NPO in our packets. We wish to express our disappointment that we were
unaware this issue was scheduled for public hearing on January 27, 1992 and we were therefore
unable to participate in the hearing.
b. Concern was expressed that discussion is being held in various forums regarding a
change in the City of Tigard annexation policy. We strongly request that these discussions be
held in a public forum. At our March meeting we request that a city staff member come to our
meeting to present us with the City's current position on annexation. We also request that a map
of the City boundaries, area of interest boundaries, and urban growth boundaries be presented
and that the information on the map be current as of March 1, 1992.
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
I
Lila Garner
I