Comments on University of Oregon Application for the North Campus Conditional Use Permit and <br />Willamette Greenway Permit <br />prepared for Eugene City Hearing on September 12, 2018 <br />George W Evans <br /> <br />I was one of the sponsors of the University of Oregon Senate Resolution US17/18-14: Withdrawal of North <br />Campus Conditional Use Permit, which was approved by the Senate on March 14, 2018. This resolution <br />included the text: y Senate calls upon the UO administration to <br />withdraw the riverfront property, north of the tracks, from consideration under the present North <br />Campus conditional use permit application \[CUP, submitted Feb 26, 2018\] in order to allow further <br />deliberations among and between the Senate, the Administration and the university community regarding <br /> Unfortunately, this did not occur: the CUP submitted in February to the City <br /> and the subject of this Hearing continues to include the riverfront property. <br />I remain deeply concerned about this part of the CUP, which allows in the plans for 45-foot structures in <br />the riverfront area north of the railroad tracks and large, fenced, floodlit artificial-turf playing fields in <br />proximity to the Willamette River. There is a long history of opposition by UO faculty, students and the <br />community to development of the north-of tracks UO riverfront area. I believe such development would <br />be a major mistake by our University and that it is not in the interests of the City of Eugene. <br />Fortunately, in his May 11 response to the UO Senate, University of Oregon President Michael Schill made <br />a commitment that changes in the area north of tracks would not be made until there is an amended <br />university Campus Plan; that the process <br />into account; that the first step will be a study of options for alternative locations of additional recreation <br />fields; and that the Campus Planning Committee will be engaged in this process. I am impressed by this <br /> given below, I do not think it is <br />appropriate for construction of artificial-turf recreation fields to be permitted in this sensitive area. <br />Furthermore, the application is for a permit that will be in place for 30 years. It is perhaps unlikely that <br />President Schill will be continuously UO President for the next 30 years. <br />In addition to objecting to the specific developments that would be permitted by the CUP in the UO <br />riverfront area, I need to first draw attention to the earlier deficiencies in the university planning process <br />that led to this point. I walk the paths in the UO riverfront area, between the Frohnmayer Footbridge and <br />the DeFazio Footbridge, usually several times per week. I have done so for many years. The consultation <br />was inadequate. I say this because while I am both a member of <br />the UO faculty and a regular walker of this path, I first became aware of the current proposals only in <br />November 2017 when, near Frohnmayer bridge, I saw a single posted notice concerning a meeting on <br />campus, which appeared about a week before the meeting (a meeting that was sparsely attended). At <br />that Nov. 8 meeting, campus planning indicated that the proposal was entering its last stage and that <br />after one further revision they intended to submit it to the City of Eugene in January 2018. The UO <br />Campus Planning Committee then voted Nov. 28 to move forward with the CUP application. Although the <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />