Loading...
07/18/1977 - Packet CITY OF TIGARD P.O. Box 23397 12420 S.W. Main, Tigard, Oregon 97223 Memorandum To : NPO #3 From: Dick Bolen Subject : NPO meeting July 18, 1977, 7: 30 P .M. , at Tigard City Hall Date : July 14, 1977 An NPO meeting is scheduled (as listed above) to discuss the develop- ment proposal for the corner of Gaarde and Pacific Highway. . ,e-2d y 7 7 .z � 2Z�-`. 110, ��c' oe�/ e Olf ; ez,/ i ez— ell t // C:`� .��-�'� �Ch.�Q�' ..cam t--� .�C--G� `-z' FROM REGULAR COUNCIL *TING JUNE 27, 1977 Item 23 - General Plan Amendment - Position Statement regarding modified residential street system - NPO III Councilman Wakem: In our discussion last week, I think my favorable response to your particular proposal, that I hope was shared by the balance of Council, was on the basis that the proposals we had seen for routing traffic through that area - seemed at least at that point to be less than satisfactory to us. Your proposal (the Mayor's) suggested a change in philosophy that we had heard prior to that, plus pointed out a new one and that was residential orientated street opposed to something that would run through traffic. I stated at the time that my support was based upon the fact that your proposal did suggest residential streets, that it seemed to be more desirable and that what we wanted to do essentially was to outline the philosophy in support of residential areas and that we would further determine whether or not thLs'particular streets that you had outlined would have some feasibility in terms of actual construction. Now, somewhere along the line, if I read all this correctly that seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle. What I get out of Mr. Kluempke's letter to us is a real concern that we are taking some kind of action without necessarily consulting NPO III - I guess what I want to indicate is that certa&ly is not what my intention was at that time or is it now. Now - regarding Council policy statement - that in it- self is fine as far as it goes, but I think the difficulty I have is that with this particular statement it doesn't go far enough. That in itself /is leans, to my mind at least, some problem with the particular interpretation. That is to say that I would be alot more comfortable with that particular statement if it were to go into some kind of background as to how you (Bolen) reached these particular conclusions. It does not do that for me. I think Dick Kluempke has concerns about it and I )know certainly did, from the phone call we got from his this evening and I guess I would to if it were taken in the context of the limited amount of information. It seems to me if we are going to have a policy statement on the 135th extension, like this is outlined, that in order for it to be meaningful to the Council and the citizens involved and to the County as a whole that it has to have some background to it. As I recall our discussion last Lamm week it seemed to me we spent 30 to 40 minutes discussing aspects of this overall proposal. I don't think you can sum it up in what I see hear as five or six sentences.