City moving toward land annexation

The City of Sisters may soon grow by 30 acres as the city council moves forward with plans to annex the McKenzie Meadows property along McKinney Butte Road just north of Sisters Middle School.

The city council agreed in a workshop last week to have staff start working with developers on an annexation agreement that would bring the property inside the city with plans for a senior living and community center.

Voters approved future annexation of the land in 2006. The property is owned by Bill Willitts, Curt Kallberg and the Reed family of Sisters.

Yakima, Washington-based developer Pinnacle Alliance Group is considering creation of a senior independent assisted-living facility and community center on the site.

A preliminary draft concept calls for the senior living facility and community center on eight acres; senior independent living cottages on 2.5 acres; a medical facility on 1.16 acres and "live/work" housing on 8.64 acres. There would be 4.52 acres of open space.

Willitts cautioned that all plans are preliminary only, and the concept could change based on discussions with the city and market factors.

A senior living facility has long been a part of developers' plans, which once also included an early childhood development center, which does not appear in the current concept. The developers also planned a residential development.

Mayor Lon Kellstrom acknowledged that there is no need for land for residential development in the foreseeable future, but he said "the council consensus was that the senior assisted-living/senior center is worth pursuing."

Kellstrom said an annexation agreement will bind the developers to certain actions "over and above the development code."

While there was consensus to move forward, it was not unqualified. Councilor Sharlene Weed is opposed to annexing the land at this time.

"We don't need to bring in that land," she said, noting that the city's current land inventory shows a more than sufficient supply for a 25-year planning period.

"We've got plenty of land in the city limits without bringing in 30 acres, especially in a downturn," she said.

Weed acknowledged that a senior assisted-living facility and a community center would be valuable amenities for the community, but she said there is other land available inside the city limits that would suit the project.

"I don't believe that they've exhausted the opportunities that are available in the city limits," Weed said. "Bring it in for assisted living? I can see doing that if it was the last option, but it's not the last option. The others haven't been tried."

Weed said that councilors are enjoined from pointing developers to a particular piece of property and declined to delineate what properties are available. A glance at the land inventory indicates that Sisters does have several parcels of appropriate size and zoning potential.

Mark Adolf of Pinnacle Alliance Group has told The Nugget that land costs are a significant factor and that the McKenzie Meadows developers have offered a discount that makes the project viable.

Councilor Jerry Bogart said "the idea of having a medical center out there is very intriguing."

He does not, however, want to see the placement of a medical center made ironclad in the annexation agreement, because there are a variety of ways that the developer could provide for medical care at the senior living site.

"If you make it too stringent and the guys don't agree to it, then nothing happens," Bogart said. "You don't want to make it too stringent, but you need to hold their feet to the fire, too."

Bogart would like to see the development phased in, with residential components deferred until the senior living facility and community center are fulfilled.

Councilor Bill Merrill expressed some reservations, though he concurred that the city should move forward with an annexation agreement, at least far enough to get information from the developers about the viability of the senior facilities.

"If we're going to come up with an agreement, we're going to have to know with some degree of specificity what they plan to do," Merrill told The Nugget.

Merrill noted that what the voters were told would be done on the property in the 2006 annexation vote is not what is on the table now. Merrill said he is not advocating for a revote and one is not required, but he is uncomfortable nonetheless.

"It's legal to go ahead and not revote, but is it ethical?" he said. "I said (at the workshop) I don't think it's ethical; I don't think that's right - but that's just me."

Merrill said the city needs to make sure any annexation agreement addresses the impact on city services created by the annexation.

"I'm not against what they're doing and never have been," he said. "I just want to be sure we've evaluated all those impacts. They've got a potentially good bunch of projects."

Author Bio

Jim Cornelius, Editor in Chief

Jim Cornelius is editor in chief of The Nugget and author of “Warriors of the Wildlands: True Tales of the Frontier Partisans.” A history buff, he explores frontier history across three centuries and several continents on his podcast, The Frontier Partisans. For more information visit www.frontierpartisans.com.

• Email: editor@nuggetnews.com
• Phone: 5415499941