PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda

520 E. Cascade Avenue - PO Box 39 - Sisters, Or 97759 | ph.: (541) 549-6022 | www.ci.sisters.or.us

THURSDAY, MAY 6, 2021 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA – 5:30 PM

The Planning Commission meeting will be open to the public via Zoom. Using Zoom is free of charge. The public is invited to join the meeting with your computer or telephone by going to the following link: https://zoom.us/j/93471932061

5:30 PM REGULAR MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING

I. CALL TO ORDER / DETERMINATION OF QUORUM / ADOPTION OF AGENDA

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 18, 2021 (Exhibit A)

III. VISITOR COMMUNICATION: Members of the public are invited to share comments not associated with the public hearings at this time.

IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: FILE NUMBER(S): MOD 20-02/SUB 20-01 - TO BE CONTINUED TO MAY 20, 2021 APPLICANT: Sisters Habitat for Humanity (Exhibit B) LOCATION: 302,312, 332, 342, 352 N Desert Rose Loop, Sisters OR 97759; Map and Taxlot: # 151005, taxlots 2000, 2100, 2200, 2300, 2400, 2500. REQUEST: Type III Review of a Master Plan modification and replat to modify the Village Meadows Master Plan (MP 05-02/MOD 15-01) and replat 6 lots in the Village Meadows subdivision (Lots 3-8) into 10 lots to accommodate attached single- family homes.

FILE NUMBER(S): TA 21-01 APPLICANT: City of Sisters (Exhibit C) REQUEST: Text Amendment to Sisters Development Code to remove Chapter 3.2.700 Urban Forestry and replace in the Sisters Municipal Code.

V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DISCUSSION

VI. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER UPDATES

VII. ADJOURN

This agenda is also available via the Internet at www.ci.sisters.or.us. The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. Requests for an interpreter for the hearing impaired or for other disability accommodations should be made at least 48 hours before the meeting by contacting Kerry Prosser, City Recorder at [email protected] 1

2 Exhibit A

Joint Planning Commission and City Council Minutes Thursday, February 18, 2021 – 4:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers, 520 E. Cascade Avenue, Sisters, OR 97759

Chairman: Jeff Seymour Commissioners: Cris Converse, Scot Davidson, Mark Hamilton, Jack Nagel, Tom Ries City Councilors: Michael Preedin, Nancy Connolly, Andrea Blum, Gary Ross, Jennifer Letz Absent: Art Blumenkron City Staff: Scott Woodford, Community Development Director, Nicole Mardell, Principal Planner City Attorney’s: Garrett Chrostek, Alan Dale, Jeremy Green Visitors: Matt Hastie (AGP), Jerry Johnson (Johnson Economics) Recording Secretary: Kerry Prosser

1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL / DETERMINATION OF QUORUM

Chairman Seymour called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 4:01 pm and roll call was taken. A quorum of the Planning Commission was established.

Mayor Preedin called the City Council meeting to order and roll call was taken. A quorum of the City Council was established.

Director Woodford stated that it has been our goal in the past to do an ethics training for the committees every year. It has been a while since this has been done, and in 2017 was the year that we did this as a group. We felt it was time and with the new members coming on board that this training would be beneficial. We are going to talk about ethics training as public officials and hear about the rules for the Planning Commission, City Council, and Land Use one-on-one which will be helpful for both bodies.

II. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A. General Rules, Public Meeting and Records Law and Ethics.

Bryant, Lovlien, and Jarvis, P.C. provide legal representation for individuals, businesses, and public sector clients throughout Central and Eastern Oregon. They have legal experience in a broad range of practice areas, including without limitation, municipal law, business and corporate law, real estate law, taxation, and employment law.

Attorney Green and Attorney Dale reviewed a PowerPoint presentation that covered the Council and Commission roles, public meetings, public records law, and ethics.

2 3 Exhibit A

The 2003 Sisters Charter establishes, among other things, the Council-Manager form of government and the powers and duties of the City Manager. Most Oregon cities with populations over 2,500 have the Council-Manager form of government. Council appoints a professional administrator, the City Manager, to act as Chief Executive Officer of the City. The relationship rests on the balance of the roles.

City Manager Functions: Attorney Green stated that the City Manager has the authority to hire/fire, organize, set administrative policy, and implement ordinances, policies, and goals of the City in accordance with Charter Section 24. (Council Rules). The City Manager prepares the budget for the Council’s consideration, recruits, hires, and supervises City staff, serves as the Council’s Chief Adviser, and carries out the Council’s policies.

General Role of Council: Attorney Dale stated that Council is the City’s legislative body elected to the council not an independent seat, all powers and authority to set policy rest with the Council, develops the policies that will direct the City’s operations, and the four general forms of decision-making are Ordinance, Resolution, Quasi-Judicial, and Motions and Consensus. Council obligations and responsibilities include focus on the community’s goals, major projects, and such long-term considerations as community growth, land use development, capital improvements plans, capital financing, and strategic planning, maintain and participate in intergovernmental relations, maintain a balanced budget, and serve as the local contract review board.

General Role of Planning Commission: Attorney Dale stated that the Planning Commission acts as an advisory board to the City Council on designated planning matters, reviews development proposals, holds public hearings and makes decisions on certain types of land use actions. The Commission advises the Council and staff on the City’s long- range goals and policies on a variety of issues including transportation, land use, and current planning, and a forum for public input and testimony on land use, development, and planning around the City.

Communication with Staff: Attorney Dale stated that the Councilors and Planning Commissioners are to follow these steps when communicating with staff: Respect the separation between policy making (Council function) and administration (City Manager function), observe and respect the chain of command, limit individual contacts with staff members, or department directors. Avoid requesting that staff perform significant work without prior approval from the City Manager, avoid influencing personnel matters, purchasing issues, contract awards, and processing of development application, or the granting of City licenses or permits.

Liability: The examples of when a Councilor or Planning Commissioner may be personally liable include budget law violations, government ethics violations, actions outside the scope of official duty, unauthorized expenditure of public funds, malfeasance in office (willful and wanton neglect of duty, public contracting violations, and/or public meetings law and public records law violations.

Public Meeting Requirements: Attorney Green stated that the Oregon Public Meeting Laws (also referred to as “open government” or “sunshine” laws were enacted in 1973 to ensure that all meetings of governing bodies covered by the law are open to the public. ORS 192.630(2) prohibits a quorum of a governing body from meeting in private for the purpose of deciding on or deliberating toward a decision on any matter except as provided under law. The laws also impose certain notice and accessibility requirements. The laws guarantee the public a

3 4 Exhibit A

right to view government meetings but not necessarily to speak at them. Governing bodies establish their own rules for public comment. All communications with respect to City business, and whether it is on the City’s software equipment, or on your personal devices, it is all a public record subject to certain exceptions.

Executive Session: Attorney Green stated that the Oregon’s “open meetings” law means that aside from fourteen narrow exceptions, (staff discipline, litigation, purchasing property), the public gets to observe Council in action “taking care of the people’s business”. Governing bodies may exclude the public (but in most circumstances not the press), from the discussion of certain subjects in executive session. Executive session is not an opportunity to protect the public from unpleasantness.

Enforcement: Attorney Green stated that the consequences of not complying with Oregon Public Meeting Laws include Legal Action – any person affected by a governing body’s decision may file a lawsuit in circuit court to require compliance with, or prevent violations of, the law. If a plaintiff is successful in proving a violation of the meetings laws, a court may void the decision if the governing body intentionally, or willfully violated public meeting law, and/or award reasonable legal fees to a plaintiff. Attorney Fees – if members of the governing body may be liable for attorney fees and court costs both as individuals, or as members of a group, if found in willful violation of the Oregon Public Meeting Laws. Negative public perception.

Public Records Requirements: Attorney Dale stated that a public record is a document that contains information regarding government business, is prepared, owned, used, or retained by government. It can be in any form – electronic or paper (email, photographs, social media posts, metadata, and databases. Examples of eligible requests include email discussion between two councilors, using their personal email accounts, discussing a potential city budget decision, or text messages regarding a proposed new policy exchanged between planning officials on their work cell phones. All requests should be made on the City’s public records request form in accordance with the City’s public records request policy. Oregon law include numerous “exemptions” from disclosure and reviewed exemptions from disclosure and saving a public body from embarrassment was not a valid exemption under the Oregon public records law. Attorney Dale stated that Conflicts of Interest, use of position for financial gain, and the responsibility Councilors and Planning Commissioners had to file an annual verified stated of Economic Interest with the State. Conflicts of Interest: Attorney Dale stated that the Oregon law recognizes that conflicts of interest are inevitable in any government that relies on citizen lawmakers. As a result, Oregon law requires, at a minimum, public disclosure of such conflicts. Common situations where a conflict of interest may arise are approval of bills/receipts in consent agenda, award of a public contract with a relative or associated business, and an approval of a land use permit.

4 5 Exhibit A

Potential Conflict of Interest vs. Actual Conflict of Interest:

A Potential Conflict of Interest arises when a public official takes official action that could financially impact the public official, the official’s relatives, or a business with which the public official or a relative is associated. If a potential conflict of interest arises, the Councilor is required to disclose the potential conflict of interest but may take action on the issue.

An Actual Conflict of Interest arises when a public official takes official action that would financially impact the official, a relative of the official, or a business with which the public official, or a relative is associated. If an actual conflict of interest arises, the Council is required to disclose the actual conflict of interest and refrain from taking official action (discussing, voting, and/or participating in any way concerning the matter in question.

Use of Official Position to Obtain Financial Gain: Oregon Law prohibits public officials from using, or attempting to use, an official position or office to obtain financial gain or avoid financial detriment. Public officials may not use public equipment for personal purposes, and/or may not use information learned through confidential City documents obtained because of the official position for personal financial gain. Examples include, without limitation, an exchange of cash (or other valuables) for a vote, or other action, or making a decision in exchange for a promise of a job.

Annual Verified Statement of Economic Interest (SEI Filing): Oregon law requires certain elected officials to file a Statement of Economic Interest (SEI) report with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission each year. The SEI reports are due on or before April 15th of each year. The report includes, without limitation, the name and address of each business in which the public official holds an interest, a description of sources of income (not amounts) and identification of any gifts or honoraria that exceeds $15.00 in value. Failure to file the statement may result in penalties.

Roles & Responsibilities in the Land Use Decision Making Process: Attorney Chrostek stated that the roles and responsibilities of the Planning Commission members include providing a citizen perspective, prepare for and actively participate in all matters brought before the Planning Commission, interact with the public on planning and land use matters, make decisions or recommendations after weighing all evidence (staff report, application materials, public input), follow all procedures, and comply with applicable approval criteria. Attorney Chrostek stated that the roles and responsibilities of the Planning Commission Chair are to lead and manage meetings and public hearings, involves all members present, especially new members, refocuses the discussion that has wandered off the point, highlights/summarizes the important points, clarifies misunderstandings, ensures motions are clearly stated before a vote is taken, closes hearing with clear next steps (unless a decision is made). The Planning Commission Chair intervenes when speakers are interrupting one another, speakers make personal attacks, speakers ramble or get away from the issue, testimony/discussion is out of order, and audience is clapping, cheering, jeering, etc. Attorney Chrostek stated that the roles of the Planning staff are to administer and enforce adopted plans, regulations, and land use decisions, assure legal sufficiency of the process and procedures (notice, record upkeep, agency/public coordination), provide information and recommendations, educate and assist the public with land use matters, current planning (review applications for development), long range planning

5 6 Exhibit A

(studies and analyzes future City needs), negotiates, facilitates, and coordinates with applicants, agencies, districts, units of government, and maintains continuity and consistency (policy, documents, people). Attorney Chrostek stated that the roles and responsibilities of the City Council being the Legislative Body that adopts ordinances necessary to amend Comprehensive Plan, zoning map, and Development Code. The Hearings Body that issues decisions on certain land use applications and hear appeals of the Planning Commission decisions. The Policy Board to set City goals and policies related to land use planning and approves the Community Development Department work plan. Attorney Chrostek stated that the Authority Structure follows State Statutes that establish Statewide comprehensive planning framework (Oregon follows a top-down model); State Land Use Goals are administrative rules that provide details for planning framework; Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document that demonstrates how the City will comply with planning framework, sets out City’s policies and goals with respect to current and future land use needs, and provides direction for zoning and land use regulations; Sisters Development Code implements the Comprehensive Plan by establishing standards and criteria for development; and Land Use Decisions must be made in compliance with the hierarchy of authority. The four (4) types of Land Use Decisions: Ministerial (Type I and II) where they are staff reviewed, no or limited discretion needed, clear and objective criteria, public notice required for Type II, decision appealable to Planning Commission, City Council, Land Use Board of Appeals, example is a Final Plat, Site Plan Review, etc. Quasi-Judicial Applications (Type III) where the decision-making body acts like a judge; requires public notice and public hearing; a record is created by staff and interested parties submitting application materials, testimony, and other evidence; decision making body determines whether proposal satisfies applicable approval criteria based on contents of the record. Some approval criteria are subjective or require interpretation; decision including resolution of all local appeals generally must be made within 120 days; decisions appealable to City Council, Land Use Board of Appeals, example is a Conditional Use Permit, Subdivision, etc. Legislative Applications (Type IV) to create law/policy applicable to all or a significant portion of the City; public notice and public hearings required by Planning Commission and City Council; Ex-parte contacts & bias generally not applicable; conflict of interest applies, check with legal; subject to approval criteria/DLDC review; applicable to LUBA. If a member of the Planning Commission, or City Council were approached by a citizen to discuss an active land use issue, they need to stop the conversation, and when asked during the hearing phase, they would need to disclose the interaction. Planner Mardell asked Attorney Chrostek what the City Council, or Planning Commission members should do when they receive an email, phone call, or run into a citizen on the street that wants to talk about a land use issue. Attorney Chrostek stated that the first thing you should do is ask if there is a pending application. If there is a pending application, you need to stop the communication right there because that is, in fact, an ex- parte communication, and your discussions could result you in being disqualified to review that land use decision. He stated that he would suggest that with emails and phone calls that you just check in with staff before returning the call or returning the email. Even if there is not a pending application, you still need to be concerned about getting too far into the specifics of any particular property, or any party. That

6 7 Exhibit A

could lead to bias or pre-judgement. If you do discuss the application, you would have to disclose what was said, say that all I did was listen, and that should allow you to continue to participate. III. DISCUSSION OF SISTERS 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Director Woodford stated that this portion of the meeting is to give an update on the Comprehensive Plan, let you know what we have been up to, and at the end of this process, we will be calling on the Planning Commission to review and recommend approval of this, and then City Council to approve it foremost at the end of this process. He stated that he wanted to make sure that each member is up to speed on the elements of the Comprehensive Plan because it is quite complicated in some cases and a lot of moving parts. He stated that we wanted to allow some time to answer any questions, etc. Director Woodford introduced Matt Hastie with Angelo Planning Group. He is the project manager for the consultants on the Comprehensive Plan. He introduced Jerry Johnson with Johnson Economics who is doing the economic work as well as other staff members that have been involved in this process - Planner Mardell, Emme Shoup, and City Manager Misley. Mr. Hastie stated that he wanted to review the schedule and process of the Comprehensive Plan Update. We are well underway, got the project kicked off during the summer, and one of first things that we did was to put together a Community Engagement Plan. We have been working on some of the technical analyses associated with the project, the Economic Opportunities Analysis, and an update on the Housing Needs Analysis. We have done some of the work as part of those two (2) tasks that feed into the Urban Growth Boundary evaluation task, but there is more to do on that. We are underway looking at the Comprehensive Plan policies and talking with the member of the Community Advisory Committee and Stakeholder Advisory Committee. He stated that all that work will feed into preparing an updated Comprehensive Plan document. Ms. Shoup reviewed the Community Engagement process for the Comprehensive Plan update which includes the virtual “COVID-Friendly” outreach, utilizing the Sisters 2040 project website and City of Sisters website, email listserv project updates, social media outreach (Facebook), Nugget articles, Comprehensive Plan Committees, a Community Web at Barclay Park, Community Conversations, and an Online Open House and Survey #1.

Ms. Shoup stated that the Online Open House #1 had 147 survey respondents, 552 page views, key highlights were support for EOA target industries, support for a variety of housing types, and outreach preference for open houses, emails, and Nugget articles. We have been able to get some face-to-face time through the Community Conversations, and it has been very important to build relationships with the community and put a face behind the Comprehensive Plan.

Community Conversation Groups include: C4C Let’s Talk (October 19, 2020), Urban Forestry Board (November 9, 2020), Planning Commission (November 19, 2020), Sisters Folk Festival (November 30, 2020), Sisters Outdoor Quilt Show (November 30, 2020), Sisters Historical Society (December 1, 2020), Sisters Chamber of Commerce (December 1, 2020), City Parks Advisory Board (December 2, 2020), Seed to Table (December 4, 2020), Traded Sector (December 9, 2020), Sisters Trails Association (January 6, 2021), Sisters Lion Club (January 7, 2021), Habitat for Humanity (January 14, 2021), Sisters Middle School Leadership Class (January 20, 2021), Sisters Rotary (January 21, 2021), Age Friendly Sisters Country (January 22, 2021), Central Oregon Area Realtors (January 29, 2021), Sisters Flight for Social Justice (February 7, 2021), and Sisters Homeless Networking Group (March 2, 2021).

7 8 Exhibit A

Ms. Shoup stated that some of the key highlights of the Open House data that we received back, participants generally supported the Economics Opportunities Analysis targeting industries and strategies and the industries that they wanted Sisters to pursue were the healthcare and social services, accommodation food services, and the recreational, equipment, and apparel industries. As far as the housing, there was overall support for a mix of all housing types, multi-family, duplexes, but definitely a preference to single family detached homes, townhomes, and duplexes. Those are the ones that they wanted prioritized in the Comprehensive Plan policies. As far as public outreach, the most preferred ways were through Online Open Houses and Surveys, email and reading the Nugget newspaper.

Ms. Shoup stated that she wanted to tell you a little bit about the Community Conversations that we have been having starting back in October. The Community Conversations are city staff facilitated workshops with various local groups to discuss the priorities and preferences of the future direction of Sisters. These groups were already pre-established, so we were able to coordinate with them and drop in on one of the virtual meetings and discuss for 60-90 minutes to address their questions and concerns about the Comprehensive Plan and gather input with a few questions. We are reaching out to these groups to try and get a balance of different groups of the community that represent the different demographics, the needs, and assets of Sisters. We have reached more than 120 people who either live and/or work in Sisters.

Ms. Shoup stated that some of the Key Themes in “Why did you choose Sisters to be your home and/or place of business” include connectedness, like a neighborhood, place to live, close to Bend, diverse businesses, traffic, downtown, community, Sisters Country, local businesses, visitors, love, small town, volunteerism, place to be, urban amenities, community events, shop local, music, workable, diverse community, age friendly, museum, health care resources, charming and growing and pedestrian oriented just to name a few.

Jerry Johnson of Johnson Economics reviewed the Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) which includes Economic Trends, Target Industries, Employment Land Needs, Capacity (Buildable Lands), Reconciliation, and Strategies. He addressed the Identification of industries, Development Status (Employment), Capacity and Supply, and Economic Development Strategies.

Comprehensive Plan Policy Analysis: Public Involvement Policies (Goal 1). Housing Policies (Goal 10). Economic Development Policies (Goal 9).

Policy Review and Analysis: Staff and consultant review of existing policies. Preliminary identification of policy gaps. Review and discussion with CAC. Review CAC input with SAC. Prepare resulting revised policy language. Review revised policies with CAC, then SAC.

Mayor Preedin asked about properties on the Development Status (Employment) Buildable Lands Inventory map that showed some lots as vacant but were not available; how did we discern between vacant and available vs. non-available.

8 9 Exhibit A

Mr. Johnson replied this was a common issue; DLCD did not allow us to say a lot was off the market because the owner was unwilling to build or sell. He said owner disposition was a complicated piece of this process. Mr. Johnson explained if the City had a fundamental change, you could update these inventories quickly. He stated that one of the things that we tell smaller communities is that you can get one (1) major recruitment that could fundamentally change the trajectory of the employment growth and consume a lot of property.

Chairman Seymour asked for the definition of partially vacant lands.

Mr. Johnson stated that the definition is the land has some kind of improvements on it, so it might be a portion of the property is developed or an employment use, but has capacity for additional development given the size, given the zoning, and given how much of the property is being used. That is the basic definition. When it comes to employment land that is another thing, we consider whether it is developable, or underdeveloped, and not being used for its zoned purpose.

Councilor Letz asked about targeted industries and businesses in a growing community, was there a balance between targeted areas and the practical needs (electricians, etc.).

Mr. Johnson replied in the land-use system, you were allowed to be aspirational but not delusional in your outlook; everything needed to be plausible and consistent with the current trends and what is expected. This was a 20-year forecast, and it would not be exactly right. You would need to update these plans every five-years as these were all living documents (Comprehensive Plan and the Economic Opportunities Analysis).

Mr. Johnson discussed the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) stating that the HNA was adopted in 2019. It includes an analysis of demand for housing, land supply for new residential development, and a comparison of need to supply. The Housing Measures Report identified policies and strategies to help meet the housing needs, and current update intended to address recent plans and development, notably the Forest Service Property. The HNA outlined the Current Housing Conditions (2020), Projected Future Housing Conditions (2020-2021), Need vs. Land Supply (Unit Type), Need vs. Land Supply (Residential Land Class). He addressed Zoning Designations, Development Status (Residential), etc.

Matt Hastie, with AGP reviewed the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA). He noted the HNA was adopted in 2019 and included an analysis of demand for housing, land supply for new residential development, and a comparison of need to supply. The Housing Measures Report identified policies and strategies to help meet housing needs, and the current update intended to address recent plans and development, notably the Forest Service property.

Mr. Hastie reviewed the current housing conditions in Sisters. He noted Sisters has a high vacancy rate due to which is a combination of homes or housing units that are vacant because they are on the market and in transition, but also because they are vacation homes, second homes, or Short-Term Rentals. He reviewed the projected future housing conditions from 2020-2041 and reviewed the zoning and development status maps. He wanted to note that by doing this work previously, it appears that some of those homes that were second homes, or vacation homes are now occupied year-round by their owners. Also, there has been a decent increase in population of about 500 people that is a combination of new homes, but also people now occupying homes that were previously second homes or vacation homes.

9 10 Exhibit A

Mr. Hastie stated that we took the updated information on how many people, households, and housing units are in Sisters and updated those future projections. We used the most current set of population growth rates that are now prepared for all cities and counties in Oregon by the Portland State University Population Research Center which is required to be used throughout the State. One thing that we did not visit was the mix of housing units by type of housing units – single family detached homes, duplexes, townhomes, etc. We had projected a future mix when we did the work in 2019, and that did assume a change in a mix over time.

Commissioner Hamilton wanted to know more about affordable housing, apartment rentals, and where they were in the analysis.

Mr. Hastie replied the HNA broke out projected needs by both ownership and rental housing; Multi-Family Units (MFU) (apartments) were also part of the mix. They assumed there would be an increased percentage of Multi-Family Units (MFU) in the future housing mix. Mr. Hastie explained the HNA talked about the need for subsidized housing, and the Housing Measures Report focused heavily on strategies intended to help support affordable housing. In the Housing Measures Report, a lot of those strategies are oriented to how the City can support non-profit housing developers, or even market rate to build units that are affordable to people with less income. The housing needs are based on income, housing size, composition, and what people can afford moving forward.

Commissioner Davidson stated that he will try and figure out another way to submit his questions, or to staff going forward. He stated that he would like to talk about a number of points in these reports.

Mr. Hastie reviewed the process for policy review and analysis. He said staff and consultant review existing policies and identify preliminary policy gaps. Then they review and discuss these with the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and review the CAC input with the Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC). From that process, staff would prepare revised policy language which is returned to the CAC and SAC to review.

Mr. Hastie said the next steps in the process were to refine the EOA, and HNA updates as needed, assess UGB sufficiency, continue policy gap analysis and review with the CAC and SAC, prepare resulting revised policy language, continue conducting community conversations and other outreach, and determine updated Comprehensive Plan structure.

Next Steps: Refine EOA, HNA updates as needed. Assess UGB sufficiency. Continue policy gap analysis and review with CAC/SAC. Prepare resulting revised policy language. Continue conducting community conversations, other outreach. Determine updated Comprehensive Plan structure.

Councilor Ross thought this meeting had been rushed because of the previous presentation taking quite a while and would like another group visit on this topic a month or so from now when things are a little more refined. He stated that he would like to talk more about Housing and some of the other things in there like the land inventory, etc. He stated it would be nice to dig in a little deeper and hear what other people had to say.

10 11 Exhibit A

City Manager Misley replied a lot of work is happening behind the scenes on this project and any member of the City Council or Planning Commission could engage with staff and the consultants one-on-one to focus on specific issues. He said staff would strategize a joint meeting for next month. This was a little rushed, we threw a lot out there tonight dealing with two dense topics. The Comprehensive Plan is going to be getting more intense, but all of you will get more immersed in the process as we move forward.

Chairman Seymour opened the meeting up for questions of staff.

Commissioner Converse was curious to hear what some of the questions other members had regarding the process.

Planner Mardell stated that this is a great time, if you are all willing to stay, and get those questions and comments out there. We can transcribe these questions, and it gives us the opportunity to reach out to the consultants and get that information, etc. We are on a solid timeline and a lot of these documents are going to inform the next steps which is going to be the UGB sufficiency report – so it would be a good time to write out your questions either tomorrow, or maybe Monday. That would be helpful for staff to get that information in a timely fashion and address any concerns before we move on to the next phase of the project.

Chairman Seymour stated that he would encourage everyone to jot down questions and consolidate them in an email or keep them for another occasion. By sending these out the to staff after the fact is a very efficient way to get these answers.

Councilor Blum stated that she would give a differing opinion. She stated there are two members of the City Council that are already on the various committees that are working through this process, and they are getting the most information and the up-to-date information. She stated that the rest of the City Council and the Planning Commission are being kept appraised of the big view as we go along. She stated that she does not feel we have the time for the consultants and staff to bring each of us individually up to that level of information especially in a group setting where we are all hearing it again. Most of those questions can be answered by the reading material that is available, and if you have questions write them down and give them to staff. She stated that trying to do it in this forum means we are all asking to be part of the committee that is going along in the process.

Mayor Preedin stated he would email his questions to staff. He recommends that if you have questions, write them down while they are still fresh in your mind and get them off to a member of the staff.

Commissioner Converse withdrew her request to hear the members questions. She stated that she would defer to the City Councils request.

Councilor Connolly stated that in light of the legal ethics component before we had this, would you recommend and encourage Councilors and Planning Commission members to cc you on the questions that are asked so that you know what is going on and what your department is being asked to do. The CAC and the SAC are diving in and doing a deep dive into all the numbers that you saw pass through, and looking at things in a more diligent manner than you experienced tonight.

11 12 Exhibit A

City Manager Misley asked that all questions be sent to Director Woodford, Planner Mardell and himself. To the extent that we need to relay that to the Attorney’s, the legal ethics component, yes, then we will forward it onto them, if we have the answer we can respond back – similarly, we can share that with the entire group as well.

Chairman Seymour stated that Commissioner Hamilton has offered to do a brief presentation about what is going on in the Sisters real estate market at future Planning Commission meetings.

IV: ADJOURN

Chairman Seymour adjourned the meeting at 6:15 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Jenkins, Recording Secretary

12 13 Exhibit B

Meeting Date: May 6, 2021 Staff: Nicole Mardell, Principal Planner Type: Public Hearing Dept: CDD

Subject: MOD 20-02/SUB 20-01 Public Hearing – Continuation Request

Action Requested: Staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to the May 20, 2021 regular meeting.

SUMMARY: Staff has received an application from Sisters Habitat for Humanity to modify the Village Meadows Master Plan and replat six (6) existing lots into ten (10) lots to accommodate additional single family attached (townhome) units. The application was deemed complete on February 23, 2021. On April 28, 2021 staff received a request from the applicant to alter their initial request to allow for single family detached units, decreased minimum lot size, and minimum lot width.

The request was submitted after the application was deemed complete and after notice of the public hearing had been sent to the neighbors, posted on the property, and posted in the Nugget newspaper. In order for revised notice to be mailed and posted in accordance with SDC 4.1, and to allow staff additional time to review the request, the applicant has agreed to continue the public hearing to May 20, 2021. The staff report and application materials will be included in the packet for the continued hearing.

ATTACHMENT: Correspondance from Greg Blackmore on behalf of Sisters Habitat for Humanity

13 14 Exhibit B

14 15 Exhibit C

File #: TA 21-01

Applicant: City of Sisters

Request: Proposed amendments to the Development Code: • Chapter 3.2.700 Urban Forestry

Applicable Criteria, Standards, and Procedures: Sisters Development Code (SDC) Chapter 4.1 – Types of Applications and Review Procedures; Chapter 4.7 – Land Use District Map and Text Amendments; Oregon Statewide Land Use Goals; and City of Sisters Urban Area Comprehensive Plan.

Hearing Date: April 15, 2021 5:30 pm, Virtual Hearing Via Zoom

Staff: Nicole Mardell, Principal Planner

I. BACKGROUND The City of Sisters has been a Tree City under the Arbor Day Foundation for 14 years, beginning in 2007. As part of the Arbor Day Foundation’s requirements, the City established an advisory Urban Forestry Board to assist in management of the urban forest. The role of the City’s Urban Forestry program is to oversee the City’s annual urban forestry work plan and provide input on management of public trees, those on city land or those in the public rights of way. The Urban Forestry Board advises the city on applications to remove, replace, or plant public trees.

In recent years, the City’s Public Works Department has provided oversight to the Urban Forestry Board and the City’s management of public trees. Staff, namely the Public Works Director, has intimate knowledge of city property and public rights of way and handles all other coordination for matters involving this type of property.

The Urban Forestry section is currently codified through the Sisters Development Code and is written to be administered by the Community Development Director. In coordination with the Public Works Director, staff is proposing to delete this section (3.2.700) from the Sisters Development Code and replace the language in its entirety to Municipal Code Section 4.05. In this approach, the language will remain almost entirely the same, although management will shift from the Community Development Director to the Public Works Director. The benefit of shifting the language out of the development code to the municipal code, is that tree removal on public property and public rights of way will become enforceable both during and outside of land use applications and proceedings and provide greater clarity to staff and members of the public. The change will not impact the City’s ability to comply with the Arbor Day foundation’s Tree City requirements. Sections 3.2.500 – relating to review of existing trees on private property during development, and 3.2.600 – street trees associated with development, will remain unchanged and located in the Sisters Development Code.

15 16 Exhibit C

II. REQUEST AND AMENDMENT SUMMARY Staff requests the Planning Commission review the proposed text amendments, conduct a public hearing, and make a formal recommendation to be forwarded to City Council.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS New text is shown below in bold, deleted text is shown in strikeout.

DEVELOPMENT CODE: 3.2.100 Purpose 3.2.200 Landscape Requirements 3.2.300 Screening, Fences, and Walls 3.2.400 Nonconforming 3.2.500 Existing Trees 3.2.600 Street Trees …. 3.2.700 Urban Forestry A. Purpose. The purpose of the Urban Forestry section is to: 1. Promote a diverse, healthy and sustainable urban forest; 2. Enhance the livability of the City of Sisters and maintain the City’s unique character; 3. Promote public health and safety; and 4. Provide for the general welfare of Sisters’ citizens; by effectively managing, maintaining, conserving and enhancing the City of Sisters’ existing and future trees located on city property or public rights-of-way; by providing ongoing education on proper tree planting, maintenance, removal and protection techniques and the benefits of trees and of Sisters’ urban forest. This ordinance further implements the policies and goals of the City of Sisters Comprehensive Plan.

B. Intent. It is the intent of the City by this section to promote: 1. The effective management of the urban forest resource; 2. The planting, maintenance, restoration and survival of desirable trees within the City; 3. The protection of community residents from personal injury and property damage; and, 4. The protection of the City from property damage caused or threatened by the improper planting, maintenance, or removal of trees located in and upon public areas and rights-of-way within the City.

C. Applicability and Jurisdiction 1. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to trees located now and hereafter on city property and public rights-of-way. 2. The City of Sisters shall have jurisdiction of all trees located now and hereafter on city property and public rights-of-way and shall have the authority to regulate the protection, planting, maintaining, removing and replacing of such trees. a. The Community Development Director or designee is authorized to: 1. Supervise the urban forestry program and implement the provisions of this ordinance. 2. With assistance from the City Urban Forestry Board, develop an Urban Forest Management Plan within three (3) years of the adoption of this ordinance and, thereafter, periodically update the Plan. 3. Implement the approved Urban Forest Management Plan.

16 17 Exhibit C

4. Develop and update code provisions establishing standards for planting, protection, maintenance and removal of public and private trees. 5. Review development applications to insure compliance with Sisters’ City Code provisions concerning street trees and other trees located on city property or public rights-of-way. 6. Implement and enforce code provisions concerning both public and private trees. 7. Be the city staff liaison to the City Urban Forestry Board.

D. Urban Forestry Board

The Urban Forestry Board shall function as an advisory body to the City with respect to this ordinance and urban forestry matters generally.

E. Removal, Major Pruning, Planting, or Attachment of Seasonal Holiday Lights to Public Trees 1. Requires City Authorization. Written authorization by the Community Development Director or designee is required for the removal, major pruning, or planting of public trees or the attachment of seasonal holiday lights to public trees. a. Request for written authorization shall be made at least 3 working days before the intended activity. b. The Community Development Director or designee shall base their written authorization on the standards, goals, and objectives set forth in this section and the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications. c. Work done under such written authorization shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of this section and the Urban Forestry Standards and Specification, unless otherwise authorized by the Community Development Director or designee. d. No such written authorization shall be valid for a period greater than 90 days after the date of issuance. e. The written authorization to remove trees may include a provision requiring the replacement of the tree(s) removed with tree(s) appropriate to the site conditions, as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. f. If the Community Development Director or designee determines that a tree is hazardous, he/she may authorize immediate emergency removal or pruning of such tree. Work shall be done in accordance with the urban Forestry Standards and Specifications, unless otherwise authorized by the Community Development Director or designee.

2. Work Standards and Specifications. a. Activities on and near trees located on city property and public rights-of-way shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance and the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications. b. The Community Development Director or designee shall develop specifications and standards for activities affecting trees located on city property and public rights-of-way, called Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications, including planting, maintenance, protection and removal of trees within the City of Sisters Public Works Construction Standards. i. The Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications shall include a Tree Selection Guide; a list of tree species, varieties and cultivars thereof, approved for planting as well as those prohibited from planting on city property and public rights-of-way. Tree species, varieties and cultivars thereof, not included in the Tree Selection Guide as approved

17 18 Exhibit C

for planting may be considered and approved by the Community Development Director or designee for planting. Approval shall be based upon the suitability and appropriateness, including drought-tolerance, of the tree species, variety or cultivar for the planting site. ii. The Community Development Director or designee shall maintain and update as necessary these standards and specifications. The initial standards and specifications and subsequent updates are subject to the approval of the City Council. c. The City recognizes the American National Standards Institute A-300 Standards for Tree Care Operations, most recent version, as the appropriate standard for tree care. ANSI A300 Standards shall apply to any person or entity repairing, maintaining, or preserving trees on city property or on public rights-of-way. The City shall incorporate by reference the most recent version of the ANSI A300 within the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications and maintain the most recent version of the ANSI A300 for public review. d. Trees located on city property and public rights-of-way with trunk, branches and/or roots located 15 feet or less from any excavation, grading, demolition or construction site, include the erection, repair, alteration, or removal of any buildings, structures, street, utilities or landscaping, shall require protection from harm and injury, as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. Protection measures shall be conducted in accordance with the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications.

3. Activities Prohibited. Unless specifically authorized in writing by the Community Development Director or designee: a. No person shall top a tree located on city property or on public rights-of-way. Authorization by the Community Development Director or designee to top a tree shall be based upon their determination that topping is necessary to alleviate a dangerous condition, including electric service interruptions, which pose an imminent threat to the public or property. b. No person shall attach or keep attached to any trees located on city property or on public rights-of-way any ropes, wires, nails, chains, or other device whatsoever, except that which is within the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications as approved for tree support or protection. i. Seasonal holiday lights attached in accordance with the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications is permissible for a period not to exceed 90 days, unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director or designee. c. No person shall damage any public tree; allow any gaseous liquid or solid substance which is harmful to trees to come in contact with them; cut or carve, attach advertising posters or other contrivance; or set fire or permit any fire to burn when such fire or the heat thereof will injure any portion of any public tree. d. No person shall major prune, plant, remove or attach seasonal holiday lights to a public tree without authorization from the Community Development Director or designee.

4. Requirements of City Personnel. a. City personnel on official business shall notify the Community Development Director or designee of all activities affecting public trees. b. City personnel on official business are exempt from the written authorization requirement of this section. c. City personnel on official business shall conduct all activities in accordance with the provisions of this section and the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications.

18 19 Exhibit C

5. Requirements of Public Utility Companies. a. Public utility companies and their affiliates shall notify the Community Development Director or designee of all activities affecting public trees within city limits. b. Public utility companies holding a current franchise agreement with the City are exempt from the written authorization requirement of this section. c. All activities shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the current franchise agreement.

F. Penalties. If, as the result of the violation of the provisions of this ordinance, the injury, mutilation, or death of a tree located on city property or the public right-of-way is caused, the cost of repair or replacement of such tree, of similar size, shall be borne by the party in violation. The replacement value of trees shall be determined by the city in accordance with the latest edition of Guide for Plant Appraisal, authored by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers.

G. Appeals. Any action related to this code section by the Community Development Director or designee may be appealed to and heard by the City Urban Forestry Board. To be effective, an appeal shall be filed within fourteen (14) working days after the decision of the Community Development Director or designee. The appeal shall be in writing and shall be filed with the City Recorder for placement on the City Urban Forestry Board’s agenda. The appeal shall clearly specify the reasons for which a hearing is requested. After a hearing, the City Urban Forestry Board shall render its decision, which shall be final unless appealed to the Planning Commission. To be effective, an appeal to the Planning Commission must be in writing, state the reasons for the appeal, and must be filed with the City Recorder within fourteen (14) working days after notice of the decision of the City Urban Forestry Board is mailed to the applicant. After a hearing, the Planning Commission shall render its decision, which shall be final unless appealed to the City Council. To be effective, an appeal to the City Council must be in writing, state the reasons for the appeal, and must be filed with the City Recorder within fourteen (14) working days after notice of the decision of the Planning Commission is mailed to the applicant. The decision of the City Council shall be final.

III. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS Sisters Development Code (SDC) Chapter 4, Table 4.1.200 lists a code amendment as a Type IV decision, regulated by Chapter 4.7 (Land Use District Map and Text Amendments). Section 4.7.200 states that legislative amendments are policy decisions made by the City Council and shall be reviewed using the Type IV procedure found in SDC Section 4.1.600 and shall conform to SDC section 4.7.600 Transportation Planning Rule compliance (if applicable). Pursuant to the SDC Section 4.1.600, the City may approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny the proposed change or recommend an alternative to the code text amendment based on the criteria in SDC 4.1.600.E. Decision-Making Considerations. The following are staff’s conclusionary findings for each of the applicable criteria:

CHAPTER 4.7 – LAND USE DISTRICT MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS 4.7.100 Purpose The purpose of this Chapter is to provide standards and procedures for legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this Code and the Land Use District map. These amendments will be referred to as “map

19 20 Exhibit C and text amendments.” Amendments may be necessary from time to time to reflect changing community conditions, needs and desires, to correct mistakes, or to address changes in the law.

Staff Finding: Staff finds that this provision is advisory.

4.7.200 Legislative Amendments Legislative amendments are policy decisions made by City Council. They are reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Chapter 4.1, Section 600 and shall conform to Section 4.7.600, as applicable.

Staff Finding: The proposal is for legislative changes to the Development Code through a text amendment application. Accordingly, it must be reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Chapter 4.1.600 and is required to conform to Section 4.7.600 (as applicable). Discussion regarding Chapter 4.1.600 is reviewed below.

CHAPTER 4.1 – TYPES OF APPLICATION AND REVIEW PROCEDURES 4.1.100 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard decision-making procedures that will enable the City, the applicant, and the public to reasonably review applications and participate in the local decision- making process in a timely and effective way.

Staff Finding: Staff finds that this provision is advisory.

4.1.200 Description of Permit/Decision-Making Procedures All land use and development permit applications, except building permits, shall be decided by using the procedures contained in this Chapter. General provisions for all permits are contained in Section 4.1.700. Specific procedures for certain types of permits are contained in Section 4.1.200 through 4.1.600. The procedure “type” assigned to each permit governs the decision-making process for that permit. There are four types of permit/decision-making procedures: Type I, II, III, and IV. These procedures are described in subsections A-D below. In addition, Table 4.1.200 lists all of the City’s land use and development applications and their required permit procedure(s). D. Type IV Procedure (Legislative). Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy (e.g., adoption of land use regulations, zone changes, and comprehensive plan amendments which apply to entire districts). Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council and appeals possible to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals.

Staff Finding: Staff is proposing an amendment to the Sisters Development Code pertaining to management of public trees. The amendments propose a revision to adopted land use regulations, therefore requiring compliance with Type IV procedure.

E. Notice of all Type III and IV hearings will be sent to public agencies and local jurisdictions (including those providing transportation facilities and services) that may be affected by the proposed action. Affected jurisdictions could include ODOT, the Department of Environmental Quality, the Oregon Department of Aviation, and neighboring jurisdictions.

20 21 Exhibit C

Staff Finding: Staff has sent notice to agencies and jurisdictions that may be affected by the proposed amendments. No comments have been received to date.

4.1.600 Type IV Procedure (Legislative) A. Application requirements. See 4.1.700. B. Notice of Hearing. 1. Required hearings. A minimum of two hearings, one before the Planning Commission and one before the City Council, are required for all Type IV applications, except annexations where only a hearing by the City Council is required. 2. Notification requirements. Notice of public hearings for the request shall be given by the Community Development Director or designee in the following manner: … Staff Finding: Staff will provide notice in accordance with 4.1.600(B) at least 14 days prior to the public hearing before the Planning Commission. A second hearing is required and will be held by City Council, notice will again be posted in compliance with this section. … E. Decision-Making Considerations. The recommendation by the Planning Commission and the decision by the City Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. Approval of the request is consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals;

Staff Finding: Staff has outlined review of compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals below.

Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement. Staff Finding: During the text amendment process, public notice of the proposal will be provided through posted notice through the Nugget newspaper and posted on the City’s website. The City will hold public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. These opportunities for public involvement satisfy Goal 1. This criterion is met.

Goal 2 – Land Use Planning. Staff Finding: Staff is following the prescribed procedure for a text amendment to ensure adequate review of the proposed text amendment. The purpose of the text amendment is to remove management of public trees from the development code and replace it in its entirety in the Municipal Code. Staff finds Goal 2 is met.

Goals 3 and 4, Agricultural and Forest Lands Staff Finding: These Goals are not applicable as the proposed text amendments will not have any known impact on either Agricultural or Forest Lands.

Goal 5 – Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments relate to the management of the City’s public trees, both those on city property and those in the public right of way. Trees are an asset to the City’s natural resources and scenic areas, although not specifically listed in a Goal 5 inventory. Staff believes the protection of significant trees in the public rights of way is in compliance with the intent of Goal 5. The changes proposed by staff are to remove language pertaining to removal of trees from the development code, and replace it in its entirety in the municipal code.

In its current location in the development code, the authority of the Urban Forestry Board and City to enforce requirements surrounding public trees are technically only triggered by a development

21 22 Exhibit C application. This has presented a significant loophole and presents challenges and a lack of clarity to enforcing the requirements surrounding public trees. The proposed amendments will allow for greater protection and enforcement for removal, damage, or major pruning of public trees. By removing the code language in 3.2.700 from the development code and replacing it in the municipal code, staff is better able to enforce removal and damage to significant public trees outside of the development process.

Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments relate to the management of the City’s public trees, both those on city property and those in the public right of way. Trees are an asset to the City’s natural ecosystem and plays a role in maintain clear air and water quality. The changes proposed by staff are to remove language pertaining to removal of trees from the development code, and replace it in its entirety in the municipal code.

In its current location in the development code, the authority of the Urban Forestry Board and City to enforce requirements surrounding public trees are technically only triggered by a development application. This has presented a significant loophole and presents challenges and a lack of clarity to enforcing the requirements surrounding public trees. The proposed amendments will allow for greater protection and enforcement for removal, damage, or major pruning of public trees. By removing the code language in 3.2.700 from the development code and replacing it in the municipal code, staff is better able to enforce removal and damage to significant public trees outside of the development process. This process will ensure greater consistency for removal of trees and reduce unnecessary removal of trees, reducing impacts to air and water quality.

Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Review of trees on areas subject to natural hazards will remain unchanged. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 7.

Goal 8 – Recreational Needs. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Review of trees on areas subject to natural hazards will remain unchanged. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 7.

Goal 9 – Economic Development. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Staff is not proposing changes at this time to private tree management. Staff finds there will be no financial impact to businesses or property owners as part of these amendments. The proposed amendments are tangentially related to the streetscape in the city’s commercial and industrial areas. Maintaining significant trees in the public rights of ways in these areas could contribute to beautification of these areas that promote a walkable and vibrant environment in support of tourism and businesses.

Goal 10 – Housing. Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Staff is not proposing any changes to management of private trees at this time. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 10.

Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services

22 23 Exhibit C

Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments relate to the management of the City’s public trees, both those on city property and those in the public right of way. The current code language surrounding management of public trees is found in the development code, which has presented a lack of clarity and enforcement for removal, significant pruning, or damage to public trees. The proposed text amendment will remove and replace this text in its entirety in the Sisters Municipal Code. The amendments will allow for more streamlined and clear management of public trees in city limits.

Goal 12 – Transportation Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Staff is not proposing any changes to management of private trees at this time. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 12.

Goal 13 – Energy Conservation Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees. Staff is not proposing any changes to management of private trees at this time. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 13.

Goal 14 – Urbanization Staff Finding: The proposed text amendments are providing additional clarity to current management of public trees in city limits, exclusively. Staff does not foresee any impact to Goal 14.

Goals 15 through 19. Staff Finding: Goals 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are not applicable because they only pertain to areas outside of Central Oregon.

2. Approval of the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and

Staff Finding: The Comprehensive Plan contains Goals and Policies for land use and development within the City. In turn, the Development Code implements the Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Any amendments to the Development Code must be consistent with applicable Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Findings specific to applicable Goals and Policies are provided below:

Sisters Comprehensive Plan Goal 1: Citizen Involvement 1.4 POLICIES 1. The City of Sisters shall seek out and encourage public participation in all aspects of the City planning process. Tasks – a. Planning Commission and City Council meetings shall be held on a regularly scheduled basis. b. Planning Commission and City Council meeting agendas shall be publicized in a manner that makes this information widely available. d. The City shall use a variety of methods to achieve citizen involvement.

Staff Findings: The proposed amendments will be reviewed through Planning Commission and City Council meetings, which are open to the public with opportunities for public involvement. The amendment proposal has followed the noticing requirements in Chapter 4.1, including publishing of notice in the Sisters Nugget newspaper. Staff finds that the proposed text amendment application (TA 21- 01) complies with all relevant policies provided within Goal 1 of the Comprehensive Plan.

23 24 Exhibit C

Sisters Comprehensive Plan Goal 2: Land Use Planning 2.4 POLICIES 1. The City of Sisters shall develop land use codes and ordinances that are based on an adequate factual basis as well as applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Tasks – a. Codes and ordinances shall spell out responsibilities for administering and enforcing land use policies. b. The City of Sisters Development Code shall be used to facilitate the development process and to implement the land use goals outlined in this Plan.

Staff Findings: The Sisters Development Code currently contains clear and objective provisions that regulate removal of trees on public property. Unfortunately, in implementing this code, staff has found that there are several loopholes related to removal or damage to public trees that has occurred outside of the development process.

In order to streamline these amendments and ensure that pruning, removal, or damage to public trees is regulated both during and outside of the land use review process, staff is proposing to remove the current language from Section 3.2.700 of the Development Code and replace it in its entirety in the Municipal Code. The remaining sections in the Development Code pertaining to private tree removal and planting of street trees will remain as is.

Staff finds that the proposed text amendment provides clarity on public tree management items, and complies with all relevant policies provided within Goal 2 of the Comprehensive Plan.

Sisters Comprehensive Plan Goal 6: Air, Water, Land Resources Quality 6.4 POLICIES 1. The City of Sisters shall ensure the protection and wise use of our natural resources. Tasks – a. The City shall ensure vegetation is and remains and integral part of Sisters. Subtasks 1. The City shall encourage the protection of mature trees throughout the community. Native landscaping should be encouraged in all new developments. Mature trees, particularly Pinus Ponderosa (Ponderosa Pine) should be protected in new developments and mitigation measures for cut trees shall be established. A standard shall be developed and added to the City’s Development code in Chapter 3.2, Landscaping, Street Trees, Fences and Walls to reflect protection requirements. 2. Efforts should be made to establish a tree-planting plan for the City.

Staff Findings: The Sisters Development Code currently contains several provisions related to the protection of vegetation and mature trees throughout the community. Staff, in implementing the current code, has found that a significant loophole exists in regard to protection of public trees that are removed, damaged, or pruned outside of the development process. Due to its current location in the development code, staff has had several instances of public trees being removed by property owners without prior approval, and has had difficult enforcing the regulations or issuing fines or fees where needed. Staff finds that by removing section 3.2.700 Urban Forestry from the Sisters Development Code, and replacing it in its entirety in the Municipal Code, will afford better protections for public trees. By placing this text in the municipal code, public trees can be protected both during

24 25 Exhibit C

and outside of the development review process. The current text, which will remain in its entirety, protects mature trees, and also outlines guidelines for urban forestry management. These elements will remain unchanged. Additionally, the development code regulations surrounding protection of mature trees on private property in section 3.2.500 which also remain unchanged.

Staff finds the proposed amendments will provide clarity and streamlining to the current code language and will continue to meet the intent of Chapter 6 within the Sisters Development Code. 3. The property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. The applicant must demonstrate that the property and affected area shall be served with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support maximum anticipated levels and densities of use allowed by the District without adversely impacting current levels of service provided to existing users; or applicant’s proposal to provide concurrently with the development of the property such facilities, services and transportation networks needed to support maximum anticipated level and density of use allowed by the District without adversely impacting current levels of service provided to existing users.

Staff Finding: The proposal is not for a specific property; it is a proposed change that would be applied citywide. This provision does not apply.

4. Compliance with 4.7.600, Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) Compliance

Staff Finding: The proposal is not for a specific property; it is a proposed change that would be applied citywide. This provision does not apply.

IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS From the time of the formal initiation of this staff report to the time of publication of this staff report, no written public comments have been received.

V. EXHIBITS Exhibit A – 3.2.700 Urban Forestry Proposed Amendments

25 26 Exhibit C

EXHIBIT A – PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS CITY OF SISTERS DEVELOPMENT CODE 3.2.700 URBAN FORESTRY

New text shown in blue underline Removed text shown in red strikethrough

Chapter 3.2 - Landscaping and Screening

Sections:

3.2.100 Purpose 3.2.200 Landscape Requirements 3.2.300 Screening, Fences, and Walls 3.2.400 Nonconforming 3.2.500 Existing Trees 3.2.600 Street Trees 3.2.700 Urban Forestry

….

3.2.700 Urban Forestry

A. Purpose. The purpose of the Urban Forestry section is to: 1. Promote a diverse, healthy and sustainable urban forest; 2. Enhance the livability of the City of Sisters and maintain the City’s unique character; 3. Promote public health and safety; and 4. Provide for the general welfare of Sisters’ citizens; by effectively managing, maintaining, conserving and enhancing the City of Sisters’ existing and future trees located on city property or public rights-of-way; by providing ongoing education on proper tree planting, maintenance, removal and protection techniques and the benefits of trees and of Sisters’ urban forest. This ordinance further implements the policies and goals of the City of Sisters Comprehensive Plan.

C. Applicability and Jurisdiction 1. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to trees located now and hereafter on city property and public rights-of-way.

26 27 Exhibit C

2. The City of Sisters shall have jurisdiction of all trees located now and hereafter on city property and public rights-of-way and shall have the authority to regulate the protection, planting, maintaining, removing and replacing of such trees. a. The Community Development Director or designee is authorized to: 1. Supervise the urban forestry program and implement the provisions of this ordinance. 2. With assistance from the City Urban Forestry Board, develop an Urban Forest Management Plan within three (3) years of the adoption of this ordinance and, thereafter, periodically update the Plan. 3. Implement the approved Urban Forest Management Plan. 4. Develop and update code provisions establishing standards for planting, protection, maintenance and removal of public and private trees. 5. Review development applications to insure compliance with Sisters’ City Code provisions concerning street trees and other trees located on city property or public rights-of-way. 6. Implement and enforce code provisions concerning both public and private trees. 7. Be the city staff liaison to the City Urban Forestry Board.

D. Urban Forestry Board

The Urban Forestry Board shall function as an advisory body to the City with respect to this ordinance and urban forestry matters generally.

2. Work Standards and Specifications.

27 28 Exhibit C

a. Activities on and near trees located on city property and public rights-of-way shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance and the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications. b. The Community Development Director or designee shall develop specifications and standards for activities affecting trees located on city property and public rights-of-way, called Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications, including planting, maintenance, protection and removal of trees within the City of Sisters Public Works Construction Standards. i. The Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications shall include a Tree Selection Guide; a list of tree species, varieties and cultivars thereof, approved for planting as well as those prohibited from planting on city property and public rights-of-way. Tree species, varieties and cultivars thereof, not included in the Tree Selection Guide as approved for planting may be considered and approved by the Community Development Director or designee for planting. Approval shall be based upon the suitability and appropriateness, including drought-tolerance, of the tree species, variety or cultivar for the planting site. ii. The Community Development Director or designee shall maintain and update as necessary these standards and specifications. The initial standards and specifications and subsequent updates are subject to the approval of the City Council. c. The City recognizes the American National Standards Institute A-300 Standards for Tree Care Operations, most recent version, as the appropriate standard for tree care. ANSI A300 Standards shall apply to any person or entity repairing, maintaining, or preserving trees on city property or on public rights-of-way. The City shall incorporate by reference the most recent version of the ANSI A300 within the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications and maintain the most recent version of the ANSI A300 for public review. d. Trees located on city property and public rights-of-way with trunk, branches and/or roots located 15 feet or less from any excavation, grading, demolition or construction site, include the erection, repair, alteration, or removal of any buildings, structures, street, utilities or landscaping, shall require protection from harm and injury, as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. Protection measures shall be conducted in accordance with the Urban Forestry Standards and Specifications.

28 29 Exhibit C

c. No person shall damage any public tree; allow any gaseous liquid or solid substance which is harmful to trees to come in contact with them; cut or carve, attach advertising posters or other contrivance; or set fire or permit any fire to burn when such fire or the heat thereof will injure any portion of any public tree. d. No person shall major prune, plant, remove or attach seasonal holiday lights to a public tree without authorization from the Community Development Director or designee.