~127 acres in the proposed area
The developer exhibit describes 127 acres; the neighborhood minutes refer to approximately 126 acres.
Save Orchard Heights. Demand a plan that actually fits.
A proposed development across roughly 127 acres would bring as many as about 650 apartments, hundreds of houses, major grading, new and realigned roads, and a possible exchange involving public land.
We’re organizing now to protect Orchard Heights’ wildlife habitat, wetlands and riparian corridors, neighborhood safety, and the public services this scale of growth would depend on.
The Scale Orchard Heights Is Being Asked to Absorb
Nearly 900 Homes, Major Road Changes, and Questions Still Unanswered
500 apartments shown on Plan 3
Plan 3 expressly labels 500 apartments. Residents don’t accept that figure as an appropriate scale for Orchard Heights.
~650 apartments described as possible
The current proposed plans also suggest approximately 150 apartments could remain possible in the northeast mixed-use area. Neither figure is presented here as acceptable.
342 single-family residential houses shown
Single-family residential house count written on the revised Plan 3 concept.
56 duplexes shown
Duplex count written on the revised Plan 3 concept.
898 total homes shown on Plan 3
The displayed total follows 500 apartments, 342 single-family residential houses and 56 duplexes—but may not include the separately discussed northeastern apartments.
What residents are protecting
Study the Wetlands and Wildlife Before Construction Puts Them at Risk
Residents aren’t asking Salem to ignore the need for housing. We’re asking the City to prove that this scale of construction won’t sacrifice wildlife habitat, wetland and riparian function, neighborhood safety, or essential public services.
The current proposed plans don’t yet provide the field studies, capacity analysis or binding protections needed to answer those concerns.
01
Wildlife habitat
What species use the fields, tree stands, waterways and riparian corridors—and how would grading, roads, lighting and habitat fragmentation affect them?
02
Wetlands and riparian areas
Where are jurisdictional wetlands, seasonal drainage areas and stream buffers? Independent delineation should come before a buildable-acreage claim.
03
Significant trees and open land
Which trees would be removed, what habitat would be lost, and what protections would remain binding after future ownership changes?
04
Road capacity and safety
Can Orchard Heights Road, Grice Hill Road, Islander Avenue and nearby streets safely absorb every phase, including construction traffic?
05
Water, power and sewer
What upgrades are required, who pays for them, and can existing systems support each phase without shifting costs or risk to residents?
06
Schools and emergency response
What school capacity, safe routes, fire flow and emergency-response resources would be required before new homes are occupied?
Independent environmental work needed
Map water, habitat and seasonal conditions before grading plans define what’s “developable.”
Residents need wetland delineation, riparian-buffer mapping, wildlife and habitat surveys, significant-tree inventories, drainage-basin analysis, and a clear explanation of effects on Dahlia Swale and Archer Creek.
Capacity before construction
Before Construction Begins, Prove the Neighborhood Can Support It
Roads
Can existing streets handle every phase, construction traffic and emergency access without shifting harm onto nearby neighborhoods?
Water, sewer and power
What upgrades are required, what do they cost, and who pays before new demand comes online?
Schools
Which schools would serve the proposal, what capacity exists, and how would students get there safely?
Emergency response
Do fire flow, station coverage and road design support reliable response times at full buildout?
What the buildout would change
Major Construction and More Density Would Change Orchard Heights Forever
The plans describe a phased subdivision, zoning changes, extensive road and utility work, tree removal and preservation, stormwater facilities, mixed-use development, and a possible exchange involving City-owned land.
01Phased subdivision
Development would occur in phases, reportedly beginning near Islander Avenue.
What residents still need to know
No phase boundaries, dates or approvals are final.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
02Master plan
The current proposed plans describe a master-plan application package.
What residents still need to know
No complete City-accepted application was verified.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
03Zoning changes
Much of the southern RA-zoned land would change to residential zoning; MU-II would be reorganized.
What residents still need to know
Final boundaries and approval requests remain unverified.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
04Apartments & mixed use
Plan 3 shows 500 apartments and the current proposed plans discuss approximately 150 more as possible.
What residents still need to know
The apartment total isn’t reconciled.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
05Single-family residential housing
Plan 3 labels 342 single-family residential houses on lots the developer describes as roughly 5,000–6,000 square feet.
What residents still need to know
Lot sizes and unit forms are not binding.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
06Duplexes
Plan 3 labels 56 duplexes described as attached middle housing.
What residents still need to know
Ownership, garages and yards are expectations, not guarantees.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
07Road network
Orchard Heights Road, Grice Hill Road, collector routes and internal streets could change.
What residents still need to know
No completed traffic-impact analysis was supplied.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
08Trees & open space
Exhibits identify significant trees, park ideas and open-space areas.
What residents still need to know
Removal counts and binding protections are not documented.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
09Stormwater & utilities
Detention, water-quality facilities and utility extensions are discussed.
What residents still need to know
Locations, capacity, funding and maintenance remain unclear.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
10Commercial potential
The current proposed plans mention a possible small commercial center near the northeast corner.
What residents still need to know
No final commercial layout or commitment exists.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
11Potential City land trade
A possible exchange involving City property north of Orchard Heights Road is described.
What residents still need to know
Parcels, values, terms and approvals are not documented.
Developer-prepared plans · Verified August 3, 2026
A Scale the Neighborhood Can’t Support
The Count Is Unclear—and Even the Lower Figure Would Overwhelm Orchard Heights
The revised plan drawing shows 500 apartments. The current proposed plans also state that approximately 150 more apartments could remain possible in the northeast mixed-use area—potentially bringing the total to about 650. The materials don’t explain whether those units are included in or additional to the 898-home Plan 3 total. That uncertainty matters, but residents’ objection is more fundamental: even the 500 apartments shown would bring a level of density and infrastructure demand this small, quiet neighborhood can’t support.
The developer’s unresolved math
The Developer Still Hasn’t Reconciled Its Apartment Count
Developer’s Plan 3 figure
500Additional northeast figure
150Possible developer total
650Developer’s stated Plan 3 total
500 apartments+342 single-family residential houses+56 duplexes=898 homes shown
If the additional 150 apartments sit outside that total, the project would reach 1,048 homes. The materials don’t say whether they’re additional or already included.
Resident position
Clarifying the count doesn’t make the scale acceptable.
The addition of 500 apartments would overwhelm roads, utilities, schools, emergency response and the quiet residential character of Orchard Heights. The developer’s numbers are shown so the public can challenge them—not as an endorsement.
Questions Salem must answer before accepting development at this scale
- Is 500 only the western apartment count—and could the developer’s proposal reach roughly 650 apartments?
- Can Orchard Heights’ roads, water systems, schools, utilities and emergency services even support the 500 apartments shown?
- Why should impact studies proceed before the developer states one complete unit count?
- Will Salem require a smaller proposal if independent studies show this scale can’t be supported?
- Which complete buildout figure will traffic, school, water, sewer and emergency-response studies analyze?
Land and zoning
From Quiet Living to Traffic, Noise, and a Major Urban Buildout
The developer’s aerial exhibit shows substantial areas of open or cultivated land. The zoning exhibit labels the northern portion Mixed Use-II and the southern portion Residential Agriculture. The concept would reorganize mixed-use zoning and convert much of the southern land to residential development.
Today
- Open or cultivated land
- Existing homes and trees
- MU-II in the north
- RA in the south
Proposed direction
- Residential rezoning
- Relocated mixed-use area
- Apartments, houses and duplexes
- Roads, parks and stormwater facilities
Needs documentation
- Final zoning boundaries
- Final developable acreage
- Binding open-space protections
- Final units, heights and phases
Commercial Zoning Would Reach Into Residential Life
More Deliveries, More Cars, Later Hours—What Will Protect Nearby Homes?
The current proposed plans show 500 apartments and discuss roughly 150 more as possible—a scale that is fundamentally incompatible with this small, quiet neighborhood. Mixed-use zoning would add commercial traffic, parking, noise, lighting and late-hour activity alongside the substantial increase in residential traffic and demand. Clear limits are necessary, but mitigation doesn’t answer the larger question of whether development this substantial belongs here at all.
Delivery traffic
Box trucks, service vehicles and loading activity would add frequent commercial trips near homes. Plans should identify delivery routes, loading areas and enforceable delivery hours.
Parking demand
Customer, employee and resident parking would spill onto nearby streets. A complete plan should show realistic demand, on-site capacity and protections for neighborhood parking.
Noise pollution
Loading, refuse collection, mechanical equipment, alarms and added traffic would change the area’s sound environment. Noise limits and mitigation should be defined before approval.
Light pollution
Parking lots, signs, storefronts and security lighting would introduce glare after dark. Residents need photometric plans, shielding standards and clear operating-hour limits.
Vehicle congestion
Commercial access points and turning movements would compound residential traffic. Analysis should address queues, intersections and the full buildout—not only an early phase.
Late-hour activity
Customers, employees, deliveries and waste collection would extend activity into evenings or early mornings. Permitted hours and enforcement expectations should be public and binding.
Roads and traffic
More Homes Mean More Cars—Where Is the Full Traffic Plan?
The current proposed plans contemplate reconstruction or realignment of Orchard Heights Road, a Grice Hill Road connection, several collector routes and new internal streets. Residents need an independent traffic analysis based on the full buildout—not assumptions selected to make one phase appear manageable.
Development traffic
What unit count will the analysis assume, and how many daily and peak-hour trips would each phase generate?
Existing streets
How would Islander Avenue, 35th Avenue, Grice Hill Road and nearby residential streets be affected?
Walking and cycling
How would residents cross collector or arterial streets, and what safe connections would be built?
Construction
Where would trucks travel, how long would road work last, and how would access be maintained?
Public cost
Which improvements would be developer-funded, and which would become City obligations?
Emergency response
Would road changes improve or delay fire, medical and police access?
Public land
Public Land Shouldn’t Change Hands Before the Public Sees the Deal
The current proposed plans discuss a potential exchange involving City-owned property north of Orchard Heights Road near the BPA corridor. The exact land, values, restrictions, obligations and approval process haven’t been documented in the materials residents received. The public should see the complete terms before Salem makes a commitment.
Resident position
Keep Public Land Public—No Trade for a Larger Private Buildout
- 01
Define the land
Publish exact parcels, acreage, ownership, easements and legal descriptions.
- 02
Value it independently
Release current appraisals that account for zoning, access, topography and development constraints.
- 03
Show both benefits
Explain what the public receives—and what private development gains from the exchange.
- 04
Decide in public
Identify the hearings, votes, notice, review criteria and appeal rights before any commitment.
What land would change hands?
- Parcel numbers and legal descriptions
- Maps and acreage
- Current and proposed ownership
- Zoning, easements and access constraints
What is each parcel worth?
- Independent appraisals
- Dates and comparable sales
- Zoning and rezoning assumptions
- Topographic, utility and environmental constraints
What would the public receive?
- Public park acreage and access
- Trail and recreation commitments
- Tree and habitat protection
- Construction and long-term maintenance funding
What would private development receive?
- Developable acreage and road access
- Zoning advantages
- Stormwater flexibility
- Changes in unit capacity or constraints
Who decides?
- Planning and parks review
- City Council or commission roles
- Public hearings and notice
- Appeal rights and required votes
What’s verified
Salem Can’t Judge What the Developer Hasn’t Fully Documented
A developer’s plan can show what’s being considered. It can’t substitute for accepted applications, independent studies, binding conditions or a public decision.
City records
Officially established
01Our Salem zoning changes adopted in 2022
02Current zoning lookup tools
03Separate 2916 Orchard Heights decision
Developer-prepared
Shown in current plans
01Approximately 127-acre site
02Plan 1 capacity comparison
03Plan 3 revised concept
04500 apartments drawn
05342 single-family residential houses
0656 duplexes
07Road and zoning concepts
08Potential land trade and small commercial center
Neighborhood record
Raised in meetings
01Resident concerns
02Approximate timing estimates
03Initial phase of approximately 50 lots
04School, water and utility discussion
Before major decisions
Still required
01Reconciled unit count
02Complete application
03Building heights and bedroom mix
04Traffic and drainage studies
05School and utility capacity
06Tree-removal inventory
07Binding open-space plan
08Land-trade parcels and appraisals
09Infrastructure cost allocation
10Formal review schedule and deadlines
The Minimum Salem Should Require
Independent Studies Before Irreversible Decisions
Salem should require traffic, drainage, habitat, and infrastructure studies conducted independently of the developer and available for full public review.
Complete record
Plans, unit counts, phases and land-trade terms that agree with one another.
Independent proof
Traffic, drainage, habitat and infrastructure studies residents can examine.
Public accountability
Clear criteria, binding commitments and enough time for meaningful review.
Who to contact
Demand Clear Written Answers From the People Shaping This Proposal
Residents can direct questions to Ward 8’s elected representative and the developer’s planning consultant. Ask about the proposal’s scale, traffic, infrastructure, wetlands, wildlife, public land and review schedule.
Ward 8 City Councilor
Micki Varney
City of Salem
Ward 8’s elected representative can press for complete studies, a transparent review process and clear answers about whether this proposal fits West Salem.
Project planning consultant
Ryan O’Brien
Planning & Land Design, LLC
The planning consultant identified in the project materials should be able to address plan details, unit assumptions, road concepts, environmental work and the proposed land exchange.
How we got here
The Proposal Is Moving—Residents Need to Act Before Decisions Harden
- 2009Developer exhibit
Earlier Orchard Heights Road concept
The developer narrative says the property owner previously proposed relocating Orchard Heights Road for construction purposes. The current materials argue that the earlier alignment did not account for the later design.
- July 2022Official record
Our Salem zoning changes adopted
The City adopted changes to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning map and zoning code. The official record says only the northern half of specified Orchard Heights properties was rezoned MU-II.
- April 2024Official record
Separate 2916 Orchard Heights project approved
A separate 186-unit multifamily development was approved. The materials reviewed don’t establish that it’s part of the developer’s current Orchard Heights proposal.
- June 4, 2025Developer exhibit
Date printed on developer narrative
The uploaded packet’s first page bears this date and describes Plan 1, Plan 3, zoning, roads, parks, stormwater and a potential City land trade.
- June 4, 2026Meeting summary
Orchard Heights proposal discussed with WSNA
Meeting minutes summarize the developer’s presentation concerning approximately 126 acres, apartments, subdivision phases, roads, parks, stormwater, schools and a possible land trade.
- August 6, 2026Meeting summary
Follow-up neighborhood discussion listed
The WSNA agenda lists the developer’s Cherry Hill subdivision presentation under new business. This isn’t a formal land-use hearing.
- Later 2026 / early 2027Meeting summary
Possible future filings
The presenter reportedly estimated transportation material in two to four months and subdivision plans in six to eight months. These are estimates, not filing deadlines.
Take action
Speak Up Before the Plan Becomes Harder to Change
The most effective time to demand evidence and safeguards is before the proposal becomes difficult to change.
Stay informed
Receive concise alerts when plans, studies, notices, meetings, deadlines and decisions become available.
Join the email listReview the evidence
Read the developer exhibits, review the revised Plan 3, and see which questions remain unanswered.
View the source documentsShow up
Attend neighborhood meetings and future hearings. Ask specific questions and request that answers enter the record.
Get meeting alertsComment effectively
When a formal application opens, address applicable approval criteria with documented evidence—not rumors or personal attacks.
Learn how public comment worksBefore Salem advances the proposal
Promises Can Change. Orchard Heights Needs Six Commitments in Writing.
These are minimum requirements, not acceptance of 500 apartments or development at this scale. Residents believe the proposal is too large for this quiet neighborhood and want Salem to address that fundamental concern before it advances.
01
One defensible unit count
Reconcile the 500, ~650 and 898 figures before impact studies rely on them.
02
Traffic and drainage studies
Publish assumptions, downstream effects, mitigations and phase-by-phase impacts.
03
Infrastructure capacity
Show how roads, water, power, sewer, schools and emergency response will keep pace.
04
Habitat and water protection
Document wetlands, riparian corridors, wildlife habitat, significant trees and binding buffers.
05
Complete land-trade terms
Release parcel maps, appraisals, restrictions, public benefits and private development gains.
06
Binding open-space commitments
Separate usable public space from stormwater infrastructure and protect it long term.
Frequently asked questions
Before Salem Moves Forward, Residents Deserve Clear Answers
Join the email list for updates, attend neighborhood meetings and future hearings, review the source documents, and ask specific questions about traffic, habitat, utilities, schools, emergency response and the potential land trade. You can also send relevant documents or corrections to the email listed on this site.
No final City approval for the complete development proposal was verified in the materials reviewed. Current figures come primarily from developer meeting exhibits and a neighborhood meeting summary.
Plan 3 shows 500 apartments, with roughly 150 more described as possible in the northeast. Residents believe even the lower figure is incompatible with Orchard Heights’ roads, infrastructure and quiet residential character. Neither figure is presented here as acceptable.
The current proposed plans describe 500 apartments on the western side and approximately 150 potentially possible in the northeast. They don’t clearly explain whether those units are included in or additional to the Plan 3 total. Clarifying that discrepancy wouldn’t resolve residents’ objection to development at either scale.
Plan 1 is a developer-created illustration of what a different zoning arrangement could theoretically accommodate: 1,740 apartments, 351 detached lots and 56 middle-housing units. It is not established as the developer’s current preferred construction plan.
The drawing labels 500 apartments, 342 single-family residential houses and 56 duplexes, which total 898 homes. Separate language about approximately 150 northeastern apartments creates an unresolved discrepancy.
Not necessarily. Mixed-use zoning can permit residential and commercial uses. The current proposed plans mention a possible small commercial center, but no final commercial plan has been established.
The current proposed plans discuss a possible exchange involving City-owned property north of Orchard Heights Road and land that could be used for a park or open space. Exact parcels, values, constraints, ownership terms and approvals aren’t documented in the reviewed materials.
The aerial exhibit shows open or cultivated land, and the zoning map labels part of the site Residential Agriculture. That does not by itself establish permanent farmland protection.
Developer materials propose reconstructing or realigning roads and moving a previously planned interior alignment toward the existing road corridor. No final approved road design was included.
The exhibits identify significant trees and discuss both removal and preservation. A final tree inventory and binding preservation plan were not included.
No. State and local housing laws influence what cities must allow, but the reviewed materials do not establish that Oregon requires this exact unit count, road plan, zoning layout or land trade.
A separate 186-unit multifamily project was approved at 2916 Orchard Heights Road NW. The reviewed materials don’t establish that it’s part of the developer’s current proposal.
A formal comment opportunity generally begins after the City receives and processes an applicable land-use application. The procedure and deadline depend on what is filed. Always verify deadlines with the City.
What the Developer Submitted to Residents
Read the Plans That Would Reshape Orchard Heights
The developer calls this proposal “Cherry Hill.” These are developer-prepared meeting exhibits, not City-approved plans. Full-page scans preserve handwritten annotations, legends, dates and surrounding context.
Developer narrative
Cherry Hill Planned Development narrative. The uploaded packet references June 4, 2026, while the narrative page itself bears the date June 4, 2025.
West Salem vicinity map
Developer meeting exhibit identifying the approximate site and nearby City property.
Aerial site image
Developer meeting exhibit showing the approximate site boundary over aerial imagery.
Plan 3 revised concept
Revised concept showing 342 single-family residential houses, 56 duplexes and 500 apartments, with roads, open space and stormwater areas.
Zoning exhibit
Exhibit showing Mixed Use-II zoning in the northern portion and Residential Agriculture zoning in the southern portion.
Plan 1 comparison
Developer capacity comparison showing 1,740 apartments, 351 detached lots, 56 middle-housing units and 2,147 total units.
Road realignment concept
Developer illustration of possible Orchard Heights Road and Grice Hill Road changes.