Salem City Council on Oct. 23 approved first passage of a proposed Smart Growth Overlay zoning amendment that would allow an expansion of LifeBridge's shelter footprint and construction of Harbor Light permanent housing units on property along Margin, Endicott and High streets. Councilors voted in favor at first passage and referred the measure to the Committee on Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs, co-posted with the committee of the whole, for further review and refinement.

The ordinance would add a project-based Smart Growth Overlay subdistrict (identified in council materials as a new section under Chapter 7, special residential district regulations) for the LifeBridge/Harbor Light sites. Councilors amended a scrivener's error in the ordinance language before advancing the measure to committee.

Why it matters: supporters said the combined project pairs expanded shelter capacity with small permanent supportive housing units and supportive services; opponents and some councilors urged more clarity about services, local oversight and neighborhood impacts before final approval. The council's first-passage vote allows more detailed committee review and follow-up before a second passage vote that would finalize the zoning change.

Council discussion and concerns centered on board governance and neighborhood protections. Several councilors said they want a Salem resident represented on the project board and clearer guarantees about local preference in tenant selection for Harbor Light units. Councilor Drislow said she valued LifeBridge's work but remained concerned about program scope and daytime services, saying, “I deeply admire the work LifeBridge has done to support those experience homelessness, and I know firsthand how challenging and important that work is.” Councilor Rossello described LifeBridge as “a valued partner to the city of Salem” and urged that submitted project plans adhere strictly to overlay dimensional and open-space requirements.

Proponents pointed to existing Harbor Light examples in Salem and data presented at prior joint hearings indicating Harbor Light apartments have not generated the neighborhood problems some residents feared. Opponents and some residents urged stronger day-programming, caps on future shelter bed expansions, and better neighborhood outreach. Councilors repeatedly urged that the project plans respect the overlay's requirement that—per the draft zoning—up to 75% of a lot may be building area with the remainder preserved as open space; several councilors said no variances should be requested for open-space requirements.

A scrivener's amendment to correct a numeric reference in the ordinance (noted by Councilor Hepworth) was adopted before the first-passage vote. The council recorded roll-call votes in the meeting: Watsonfeld (Yes), Varela (Yes; recused earlier from a related matter), Scott (Yes), Mercillo (Yes), Merkel (Yes), Jurislow (No), Harvey (No), Hepworth (Yes), Davis (Yes), Cohen (Yes), Prozniewski/President (Yes). The clerk recorded the final tally on first passage as nine in favor, two opposed; the matter will return to committee for additional detail before a second passage vote.

Next steps: the ordinance will be worked on in the Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs Committee (co-posted with the committee of the whole) to address outstanding questions about board composition, local preference, services and design details. Councilors and staff urged the project team to provide neighborhood-specific answers before second passage.

Provenance: The transcript records the zoning item and debate beginning with council discussion about LifeBridge and Harbor Light and running through the roll-call first-passage vote (see meeting transcript segments beginning with discussion of LifeBridge and Harbor Light and concluding with the roll-call vote).