Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs kids law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

I have been involved in this issue for over ten years!

 I do not know where to start, It is a major mess.

Ask Mr. Adams how selling the Idea that more green space (Taking buildable land and rezoining it as green space) makes (His boss was for this also) the city more desireable or livable?

 Ask some one from planning why they took over 1400 (That is 1,400 acres or  63,000 buildable lots out of the UGB) to protect the "Endangered Speceis" I have the letter from planning that confirms this in 1999! This affected my property even though it does not have any water on it and Salmon have never been found in S.W. Pdx  (The hills are clay Salmon need gravel bed to spawn) These are just minor factors when it comes to planning!

  These 14,000 acres have not been returned to the UGB in S.W. Portland.

  My property was rezoned in 1999 by planning from R-10 ( the zoning was reversed from smaller lots to larger lots to give you example a R-10 lot you could put four(4) R-2,500) to R-20 (8 R-2,500) ( Taking it out of Portlands Comp plan and also not conforming to Metros goals of 4.5 lots per acre (Portland 2 lots per acre now),also violating Portland City Charter

If you want to ask a very valid question to Adams and counsil ask them If they are for infill then why have they voted down every Measure 37 and 49 claim down except 2-3 (One was nine) I have sat in council meetings and watch them vote against every property owner trying to get to the point so thier property will conform the the neighborhood ( This is where the press stops listnig) .

 If you are in favor for infill then why do you and couincil constantly vote for against any infill to conform to neighborhoods (Short answer is "Newbees do not want anymore development! Close the door I'M in!! One of them just got on city council)

We are not asking for special rights we are trying to have the exact same rights as our neighbors (Not special just the same! Read this over and slower!)

Alot of this Infill is controled by special interest groups (Compare S.E with S.W where you have 20,000 sqt lots compared to 2,500sqt l

503-936-3774

Nothing personal but in the past you have not done your homework and have not asked the important questions.

posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context