Council meets on Monday, and they will hear an information item, a big update, on the process to designate Climate Friendly Areas, which the City prefers to brand "Walkable Mixed-Use Areas."
 |
A little bird says...are we listening? Lower ballfield, Bush Park earlier this summer |
The City has unfortunately chosen a pathway that DLCD apparently approves (this is very weird!), but which is a bit phony, by design or by accident, and yields an actual Potemkin village, a paper success that will have insufficient correspondence to reality.
 |
Map with Staff Report Text from Tech Memo #1 (see below)
|
A knowledgeable former State land use expert says of the process:
the results are deeply disturbing: Salem is likely to fall way short....A big reason is that the city is vastly over-estimating the amount of housing that might be built downtown and in the other three areas that it is considering as CFAs....But the best example is downtown: the city study asserts that there is "zoned capacity" for about 20,000 housing units downtown - implying that is an achievable amount of housing in the next 20-25 years, even though there are only about 1000 housing units in downtown now, and that current adopted plans forecast only about 2,000-3000 units would be built over this time. In short, it's highly misleading and left as is, will leave the city way short of meeting the state's 30% target....
The clear objective of the state rules is to get 30% of *all* housing in CFAs by 2050. Salem's study - whether it follows the rules or not - leaves us hugely short of that goal. My guess is that it gets us to maybe 5-10% of all housing in CFAs. To get anywhere near close to 30%, we'd need to build *all* new housing in CFAs; something that clearly isn't going to happen under existing plans that target 80% or more of new housing to outlying car-dependent neighborhoods.
Very similar points are made here in three posts over the spring and summer:
1000 Friends anticipated all this back in January.
 |
1000 Friends letter Jan. 11th, 2023
|
In a letter to city planners here and in several other cities (curiously not included in the agenda packet here for Monday) they cautioned against dramatic overestimation and "unrealistic assumptions."
Overestimation is exactly what the City's current approach employs.