City Council, November 13th - Scenario Planning

Council meets on Monday and they will look to approve an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT for scenario planning.

From the Staff Report:

The regional scenario planning process requires the Salem-Keizer metropolitan area to evaluate and determine what changes are needed to land use and transportation plans and programs in order to meet the State’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction targets. The process is similar to the scenario planning work that was done with the Our Salem project; the focus then was on land use changes. Staff anticipates that the new regional scenario planning work will focus on transportation changes, including current and future investments in active transportation, fleet and fuels, transit, pricing, parking management, education, marketing, and roads. Specifically, the planning process will establish regional performance targets and local performance measures that Salem will then incorporate into its Transportation System Plan.

I hope that the Scenario Planning process will in fact yield "performance targets" and "performance measures." 

But so far, the scenario planning work in Our Salem has been so very squishy. See the header image for the blog! That "preferred scenario" hardly made a dent in emissions. 

The Climate Action Plan has all this groovy language about a 50% reduction by 2035, just a little over a decade away, and yet our actual planning and progress look remote from attaining this. The link between target/measure and action has not been very close.

Oriented to process rather than a plan
(DLCD, August 2022)

A year ago, a one pager from DLCD used more general language, and talked about helping people "understand issues." That might set more realistic expectations for this round of Scenario Planning.

If Salem only were involved we might be able to attain those firmer performance targets and measures. But the process specifically calls for "consensus":

A regional advisory committee - referred to by the State as a “governance structure” - will be formed to make key decisions during the scenario planning process. The City has worked with staff and elected officials from the City of Keizer and Marion County to propose the following composition of the committee of elected or appointed members: three Salem members, two Keizer members, two Marion County members, and one member from Cherriots. The committee will make decisions by consensus.

Even if representatives from Salem and Cherriots embrace climate action, there is no way representatives from Keizer and Marion County are going to support urgency in climate action. Consensus in governing structure looks like recipe for watering down, and the project outcomes and deliverables will be rounded down to the lowest common denominator (even as the framing rhetoric will round up to the most optimistic outcome).

Still, hopefully the process will be able to give more visibility to current incoherence in our planning.

Southeast Salem has "empty" buildable land, including the great swath of current and former State land the City is trying to get onto the property tax rolls, but this land on the edges is all car-dependent. Is this really where we want to focus new development?

"Buildable land" (2018) and State lands (2023)

The Climate-Friendly/Walkable Mixed-use Area designation is wildly unrealistic, with targets completely untethered from reality. If there's too much focus on car-dependent greenfields on city edges, there's also this weird fantasy of super-intense density downtown.

Downtown CFA/WaMUA target

Scenario Planning could offer a critical check and point the City to a reassessment. We need a more distributed set of hubs with plausible mid-rise forecasts and a plan to attain them in reality. 

And the new mixed-use designations on busy arterial streets do not seem likely to redevelop with housing in the short time frame necessary here, and also require a lot of stroad-to-boulevard conversion. Scenario Planning could give more visibility to this disjunction and an impetus to transforming our arterials.

Much of the proposed change was
for arterial corridors
Our Salem map

There's lots of potential in the Scenario Planning Process, but it does not look like anything itself organized for strong action. It may just be another instance of talk more than walk. But if it is done right, it could set the table for sequels with stronger planning action.

These three broad issues will be ones in particular I am hoping the Scenario Planning analysis will discuss in detail.

So, you know, "prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

Bullets for the rest:

• In the Administrative Purchases there are two $350,000 "not to exceed" consultant of record contracts for "Communications, Engagement, and Outreach Support Services" with the City Manager's office. Couldn't the City just apply that funding instead to Public Information Requests and even just publishing information so a request isn't even necessary? This looks like an instance of prioritizing slick messaging over sharing substantive information.
• It's good to see more attention to "Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), also Known as Forever Chemicals."
• Continuation of the Hearing on sign code update.
• A Public Hearing on climate mitigation for large parking lots and to make SROs more broadly available. (See previously notes on it at the Planning Commission and then the first time at Council.)
  
• A settlement on Police brutality. (Not on the agenda, Salem Reporter has news of a much larger jury award for Police brutality.)
  
• And the current Legislative priorities, with a proposal to "Authorize the City Council’s Legislative Committee to act on behalf of the Council during the 2024 Legislative Session, adopting positions on bills outside the scope of the policy statements." With the short session it makes sense, but that also means the Public will have much less opportunity to comment on proposed City responses and lobbying.
• See also Salem Reporter's Council preview, which leads with garbage rates.