By Anne Scheck
TRANSPORTATION ISSUE
County Commission: No; Independence Says Yes
In what appeared to be a stinging rebuke, the Polk County Board of Commissioners told a representative of Cherriots last week that lack of trust toward the agency prevented them from signing a letter of support for a funding effort aimed at providing a long-term transportation plan that would include Polk County. The decision was made at a board meeting after Ted Stonecliffe, a Cherriots transit planner, presented the request to the commissioners.
In contrast, Independence has signed a letter in favor of the request by Cherriots, said Tom Pessemier, city manager. The application – to the state’s Transportation Growth Management fund – seeks revenue to construct a 20-year plan for transit in Marion and Polk counties. The move by Independence came after the opposite action was taken by the Polk County Board of Commissioners.
Referring to what he said was a history of being “discounted” by the Salem-based mass transit agency, Commissioner Craig Pope said he felt signing the letter would be wrong. “We have no relationship,” he said. “There is no way I would sign anything to support this,” concurred Commissioner Mike Ainsworth. Due to a past record of interaction between Cherriots and the board, “trust was broken,” explained Commissioner Lyle Mordhorst.
A statement provided by Patricia Feeny, Cherriots’ director of communication, expressed regret with the decision. “While we are disappointed not to have a letter of support from our Polk County partners, our mutual work and collaboration will continue through the Mid-Willamette Valley Area Commission on Transportation and the Salem-Keizer Area Transportation Study Metropolitan Planning Organization,” the statement said. “Through these and other venues, we will identify opportunities to provide more and better communication,” it concluded.
TRANSPORTATION ISSUE
County Commission: No; Independence Says Yes
In what appeared to be a stinging rebuke, the Polk County Board of Commissioners told a representative of Cherriots last week that lack of trust toward the agency prevented them from signing a letter of support for a funding effort aimed at providing a long-term transportation plan that would include Polk County. The decision was made at a board meeting after Ted Stonecliffe, a Cherriots transit planner, presented the request to the commissioners.
In contrast, Independence has signed a letter in favor of the request by Cherriots, said Tom Pessemier, city manager. The application – to the state’s Transportation Growth Management fund – seeks revenue to construct a 20-year plan for transit in Marion and Polk counties. The move by Independence came after the opposite action was taken by the Polk County Board of Commissioners.
Referring to what he said was a history of being “discounted” by the Salem-based mass transit agency, Commissioner Craig Pope said he felt signing the letter would be wrong. “We have no relationship,” he said. “There is no way I would sign anything to support this,” concurred Commissioner Mike Ainsworth. Due to a past record of interaction between Cherriots and the board, “trust was broken,” explained Commissioner Lyle Mordhorst.
A statement provided by Patricia Feeny, Cherriots’ director of communication, expressed regret with the decision. “While we are disappointed not to have a letter of support from our Polk County partners, our mutual work and collaboration will continue through the Mid-Willamette Valley Area Commission on Transportation and the Salem-Keizer Area Transportation Study Metropolitan Planning Organization,” the statement said. “Through these and other venues, we will identify opportunities to provide more and better communication,” it concluded.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ENDORSES CODE CHANGE
The Independence Planning Commission decided Monday night that another code change is needed for their city, after a local resident was turned down when he wanted to construct an accessory building deemed too tall for his property. The applicant, Dustin Ball, presented examples of such structures throughout Independence, where homeowners had secured a building permit that he said he was being denied.
Under the current city code, a calculation based on Mr. Ball’s current roof height would prohibit the building he proposed. However, Mr. Ball has a ranch-style home with a relatively low-pitched roof, said Fred Evander, city planner. Mr. Ball told the planning commissioners that “this only became an issue when we raised it, proactively.”
“This is similar to the vinyl-fence issue,” observed Commissioner Kate Schwarzler, who pointed out that a homeowner seeking a vinyl fence was barred from having one, despite the fact that there were vinyl fences in yards throughout Independence. “It required a code change,” she said.
During a discussion, the commissioners noted that the vinyl-fence coding change was done for a different reason: there may have been violators of the ban on vinyl fencing, but they had not sought building permits. The homes with accessory buildings apparently had done so – and had been approved. Even so “it is not consistent and it is frustrating,” said Ms. Schwarzler.
The commissioners directed Mr. Evander to return with code-change alternatives. “In the grand scheme of code changes, this would be one of the easier ones,” he said. He added that this may be the first of several coding revisions. The code book is several hundred pages long, and he already has worked to consolidate the regulations. Additionally, he urged the planning commission to see themselves, in part, as community “problem solvers.” If there is a “pressing issue” from the public, it can be brought forth by the commissioners themselves at future planning commission meetings, he said.
The Independence Planning Commission decided Monday night that another code change is needed for their city, after a local resident was turned down when he wanted to construct an accessory building deemed too tall for his property. The applicant, Dustin Ball, presented examples of such structures throughout Independence, where homeowners had secured a building permit that he said he was being denied.
Under the current city code, a calculation based on Mr. Ball’s current roof height would prohibit the building he proposed. However, Mr. Ball has a ranch-style home with a relatively low-pitched roof, said Fred Evander, city planner. Mr. Ball told the planning commissioners that “this only became an issue when we raised it, proactively.”
“This is similar to the vinyl-fence issue,” observed Commissioner Kate Schwarzler, who pointed out that a homeowner seeking a vinyl fence was barred from having one, despite the fact that there were vinyl fences in yards throughout Independence. “It required a code change,” she said.
During a discussion, the commissioners noted that the vinyl-fence coding change was done for a different reason: there may have been violators of the ban on vinyl fencing, but they had not sought building permits. The homes with accessory buildings apparently had done so – and had been approved. Even so “it is not consistent and it is frustrating,” said Ms. Schwarzler.
The commissioners directed Mr. Evander to return with code-change alternatives. “In the grand scheme of code changes, this would be one of the easier ones,” he said. He added that this may be the first of several coding revisions. The code book is several hundred pages long, and he already has worked to consolidate the regulations. Additionally, he urged the planning commission to see themselves, in part, as community “problem solvers.” If there is a “pressing issue” from the public, it can be brought forth by the commissioners themselves at future planning commission meetings, he said.
COMING UP
City Council Meeting tonight. Formal adoption of the 2019-2020 budget is expected. 6:30 pm at the Civic Center. BE SURE TO CHECK OUT the new city web page!
City Council Meeting tonight. Formal adoption of the 2019-2020 budget is expected. 6:30 pm at the Civic Center. BE SURE TO CHECK OUT the new city web page!
FINAL NOTE
Skippers on Main Street downtown has announced it’s closing at the end of June -- the business will be concentrating on its Monmouth location. Plans for a new commercial tenant at the soon-to-be-vacated space are not known.
Skippers on Main Street downtown has announced it’s closing at the end of June -- the business will be concentrating on its Monmouth location. Plans for a new commercial tenant at the soon-to-be-vacated space are not known.
RSS Feed