City Council, September 9th - McGilchrist Culverts

At Council this evening, there is an application "for U.S Department of Transportation funding to design and construct the Replacement of Railroad and McGilchrist Street SE Culverts on the West Fork of Pringle Creek."

Two culvert upgrades at McGilchrist

Staff say

the West Fork of Pringle Creek regularly overtops McGilchrist Street SE and floods undeveloped property located to the northeast, prompting road closures as often as four or five times a year. The proposed project includes design and replacement of the culverts at the railroad crossing on McGilchrist Street SE and existing railroad spur downstream. The improvements will meet fish-passage requirements, add flow capacity, and provide flood mitigation. The total estimated project cost is $4 million.

This is a resubmission:

The City unsuccessfully applied for this same grant in FY 2023. The application was strong in four of the seven criteria, reaching a Level 2 review. Staff attended a debrief with the U.S. Department of Transportation review team and they indicated that the application would have been more competitive if the local habitat was more demonstrably tied into the larger/regional program. For the FY 2024 application staff will enhance the narrative based on local habitat as it applies to efforts to improve the Salem area watershed, conservation benefits to anadromous fish, ecosystem benefits, and equity.

About some new code for housing production and a formal Public Hearing there has not seemed much to say. Both the Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Commission endorsed the changes, but a few neighborhood associations have complained. Significantly, the HLC did not agree with the criticism from the neighborhood associations, which included comments on historic review processes.

The paper summarized the changes this way:

• Streamlining the approval process for housing and mixed-use developments by allowing adjustments for mixed-use projects in certain areas like the West Salem Central Business District and allowing adjustments for special use standards for housing.
• Allowing more housing options like accessory dwelling units with townhouses and the conversion of existing commercial buildings into housing.
• Updating standards for housing developments to allow for middle housing in smaller lots in multifamily zones and establishing and increasing minimum densities.

They have never seemed like very great changes. Mostly adjustments on the edges and technical fixes to process. A few scattered notes here:

• "Gussie Belle Brown Apartments at Former General Hospital Site in for Site Plan Review"
• "City Council, July 8th - Conservation Area at Former General Hospital Site"
  

Finally, Councilor and Mayor-elect Julie Hoy has a somewhat irregular motion to de-delegate from the Boards and Commissions subcommittee. (There is a separate addition on this also.)

Council has a special meeting scheduled on the 16th of this month for the Planning Commission interviews, and the ostensible objection is Councilor Hoy cannot attend, as she will be "be unavailable from September 10th through 22nd" and claims she earlier was interested in learning more about the candidates.

I originally submitted a request by email to the City Manager and Boards and Commissions Committee to delay their next meeting to allow me to attend and learn more about the applicants [for Planning Commission]....I believe the Planning Commission is one of the most important decision-making bodies of the City. Planning Commissioners are appointed for a four year term, and Commissioners have significant influence on development under review by the City. Therefore, I believe, given our current housing crisis, it is appropriate that City Council directly determine which applicants are considered by the Council for Planning Commission....

Her motion:

I move that all current applications for the Salem Planning Commission be provided to all City Council members, and that City Council, at the October 14, 2024 City Council meeting, determine if additional applicants, beyond those recommended by the Boards and Commissions Committee, be interviewed for potential appointment to the three vacant Planning Commission positions.

In the Council addition she adds:

This motion would provide all the current applications for the Planning Commission to all city councilors and would give City Council an opportunity to supplement the applicants recommended by the Committee with additional applicants as determined by Council. [italics added]

On the irregularity, the City Attorney adds:

Per Council Rule 5(j), a councilor motion regarding “new business” must be submitted in writing by 9:00 a.m. on the Tuesday preceding the next council meeting. This motion is not timely under the rule. The rule further provides that an item of new business provided after this deadline may be added to the agenda as an addition, but shall not be acted upon at the meeting where first presented. Therefore, unless council decides to suspend this rule, council may not take action on this motion until its next meeting on September 23, 2024. Council Rule 26 requires a 2/3 majority vote of councilors present to suspend a council rule.

At least two of the three candidates appear comfortable with a YIMBY label and are generally pro-housing. Councilor Hoy does not seem to have noticed the candidates apps, published more than once on Council agenda in May and in August, or is talking past this. This appointment has been unusually protracted.

You may also recall that when Councilor Stapleton introduced the Vision Zero motion in January of 2023, Councilor Hoy was very intent on not understanding and not learning about Vision Zero.

There are reasons to be suspicious of this motion.