Committee works on boundary concepts

Locals citizens are continuing to map out the future of Sisters.

The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Steering Committee met on Thursday, October 3 to continue discussion of the draft study area map. The committee reviewed criteria that will be used to evaluate four “concept” alternative boundaries.

Andrew Parish, of MIG, the consulting firm retained by the City to support the UGB amendment process, was at the meeting to present major categories of criteria that will be used to evaluate the study area.

The three main criteria all relate to potential ease or difficulty of urbanizing and developing land. The committee will consider distance to existing city infrastructure, like water and sewer, as well as topography. The existing city pump station sits at 3,145 feet, and land at higher elevations could make draining to existing sewer infrastructure easier. Other topographical features, like steep grades, could increase the cost of developing land.

Improvement value, the total value of structures on a property, can also influence the cost of development. One helpful measure will be the ratio of improvement value to land value, which will help identify properties with no or low-value structures within the study area.

Finally, the development status will be considered. In addition to the total buildable acres in a given area, the committee will look at the share of property that is vacant, partially vacant, and already developed.

Parish shared two other criteria that may become relevant after the study area is evaluated using the three major criteria. If the eventual preferred alternative includes land near Indian Ford Creek, the committee may consider ODFW’s conservation recommendations concerning the wildlife corridors around the creek.

The committee may consider how CC&Rs of existing subdivisions may restrict future development. Parish said, “we’ve had a conversation with the state of Oregon…and the state has said the presence of a CC&R on this property can’t be the only reason why you exclude it.”

After the discussion of evaluation criteria, Parish shared four “concepts” of UGB alternative boundaries. In accordance with state law, the four concepts each consist entirely of land zone rural residential. The State specifies that the City must exhaust rural residential before considering forest or agricultural lands. The estimated land need sits at about 250 acres and the study area includes nearly 2,000 acres of rural residential.

Parish emphasized that these were preliminary boundaries and definitely need refining over the next weeks and months before giving them full consideration. Matt Hastie, also of MIG, who joined the meeting via Zoom, clarified that “ultimately when we identify a preferred boundary it may not be one of these areas. It may be some combinations of two or more of these areas…This is a way for us to break up this area into more manageable pieces to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses.”

Each of the initial concepts meets the city limits in the northeast quadrant of town and accounts for between 270 and 340 buildable acres. Concept 1 is bounded by the airport in the northwest, Indian Ford Creek in the east, and Highway 126 in the south. Concept 2 takes the airport as its southeast border, running north between Indian Ford Creek and North Pine Street. Concept 3 runs along Highway 126 to the east side of Indian Ford, including the Wild Horse Ridge subdivision. Concept 4 includes primarily properties beyond one-half mile from the existing city limits, northeast of the airport.

Ahead of this meeting, the City mailed notices to every residence within the UGB study area. This meeting had the largest public audience of the process so far, and provided nearly 30 minutes for public comment. Many comments came from residents of subdivisions in the study area sharing corrections or updates to the city’s understanding of their CC&Rs.

The next steering committee meeting will likely be in early 2025, in which the steering committee will evaluate alternative boundary locations. Before this meeting, Parish and Hastie will create more refined maps of the subareas. They will also apply the criteria discussed during this meeting to score various properties and subareas. Later in the process, the committee will recommend a preferred alternative for the city’s consideration.