Application Materials - Laserfiche WebLink

Campus Planning Committee November 28, 2017 Meeting Page 3 The master site plan sets aside a total of about 19 acres of land for conservation out of a total of almost 76 acres within the master site plan boundary. In those areas, development is restricted to uses that are allowed by Eugene code, for example: pervious surface trails, bike paths, and restoration. Where development is proposed in the master site plan, the code does not currently development area and places additional limits on building coverage north of the tracks (as presented). McArthur showed a building and open space scenario diagram to demonstrate how the plan requirements could be met. This diagram also demonstrates a key change that was made since the previous CPC meeting - limiting the size of buildings and recreation and does not encroach beyond a 200-foot setback from the river in most areas. McArthur also described a circulation diagram which showed the primary directions of necessary connections including future desired connections across the Millrace, Franklin Boulevard, and the railway tracks, as well as two potential alignments of the bike path along the river. He described the context of the plan including the EWEB site. Allowable uses in that area include residential, commercial, retail, and restaurant uses with much higher allowable densities than the maximum density proposed in this master site plan. In response to a member's question, project team members described how buildings came to be included in the master site plan. The FVP was used as a starting point for the study. However, a project with as broad a scope as the Framework Vision Project cannot consider all aspects of the university in great detail and sometimes, upon further scrutiny, not all the the area north of the railroad tracks as proposed in the FVP was not ideal for a number of for the develop-able area. Feedback from the various stakeholder groups consulted during the project outreach also indicated that a limited number of buildings with imposed height limits could be appropriate north of the tracks. Discussion: The following is a compilation of questions and comments from the committee and guests. These were addressed by the project team and discussed through the course of the meeting: A member expressed support for increasing the size of the conservation area to 200 feet but advocated for keeping the bike path out of the setback.