Urban Growth Boundary | Grants Pass 2030

There were common themes that many people identified that helped guide the alternatives analysis and concept development and evaluation.

Some of the common themes: Protect the quality of life, the "sense of hometown", and natural resources such as the Rogue River and hillsides. Family-wage jobs and workforce housing are important. Public facilities and services must keep pace with future growth, especially transportation facilities.

There were some topics where input differed substantially among participants at this early stage of the process about where expansion should occur.

The current UGB, which has not changed substantially since the early 1980s, still has enough land to meet about half of the needs for the next 20 years.

About 1,400 additional buildable acres are needed for the next 20 years (for residential, commercial, industrial, and other).

(NOTE: The total acreage needed to provide 1,400 buildable acres will be larger to account for natural constraints and existing development.)

After narrowing study areas from about 19,000 acres, there are about 4,900 acres feasible for further consideration of options to meet the 1,400 buildable acre need.

The majority of people who provided input thought the initial narrowing process was reasonable. Specific issues were identified in open-ended responses that were reviewed and considered in the next phase.

Some areas that were narrowed down earlier might be suitable to meet needs for limited sites for employment uses and/or further consideration of service issues, and these should be re-evaluated.

The majority of people who provided input most preferred a dispersed concept and least preferred a concentrated concept.

The majority of people who provided input did not prefer a concept substantially different from one of the preliminary concepts, but suggested variations on the concepts.

Whether or not part of a majority, people identified specific issues in thoughtful open-ended responses that were reviewed and considered in the next phase.

No single concept rated most optimal for provision of all public facilities/services. There are trade-offs, and aspects of each concept are better for different services.

In general, the dispersed concepts did the most to distribute transportation impacts while avoiding other substantial public facility impacts.

(NOTE: Public facility plans must be updated to ensure adequate facilities for any concept that is selected.)

A draft concept based on the dispersed concepts was developed and further evaluated. Some expanded areas were re-evaluated. After evaluation, some of the expanded areas were recommended for inclusion in the draft concept.

After further analysis and evaluation, some areas that were previously considered in the dispersed concepts and the expanded areas were not recommended for inclusion in the draft concept.

Constraints and existing development were reviewed to determine the total acreage necessary to accommodate the additional 1,400 buildable acre need, and the concept was adjusted to provide the necessary acreage.