Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

One opponent to the Master Plan asserts that “without specific condition, the North Campus Plan may not be consistent with the City of Eugene’s Transportation System Plan.” This argument appears to suggest that without more detailed development plans, transportation impacts cannot be fully evaluated. However, as noted above, the requested Master Plan does not include any specific development under which consistency with the city’s TSP could be evaluated. Unless and until development is proposed, an allegation that future development ‘may not be consistent’ with that plan is premature. The technical analysis provides adequate information to demonstrate that planned public facilities can accommodate the requirements of the proposed development. At such time as any structure is proposed, the applicant must submit an analysis of the parking demand for that structure in order to evaluate the use and parking demand in accordance with the university’s the 7 Long-term Development Plan and the TSP. (c) The proposed development shall protect visual access from main entry points from Franklin Boulevard to the river/riparian vegetation. The S-RP zone requires that at least 40% of that portion of the subject property identified for development shall be landscaped with living plant materials and requires that the building coverage and site elements be contained within 60% of the development site. This, in part, facilitates compliance with the above policy. As part of the requested Master Plan, the applicant’s Regulatory Plan includes more stringent development regulations than otherwise required by the Eugene Lane Use Code. That Regulatory Plan facilitates riparian restoration, open space improvements, and protection of view sheds (see Sheet L01). For the area north of the railroad tracks, the proposed Regulatory Plan includes maximum building coverage well below what is allowed in the S-RP zone. For the area south of the railroad tracks the Regulatory Plan ensures that development in accordance with the Master Plan will comply with the coverage standards of the S-RP zone. The applicant’s Regulatory Plan also includes self-imposed building height restrictions. The S- RP zone limits the structures within 75 feet of the top of river bank to 45 feet in height, outside of this area there is no height limit in the zoning district. The Regulatory Plan calls for buildings to be set back a minimum of 200 feet from top of bank and building heights south of the tracks limited to 85 feet. The proposed Regulatory Plan further restricts coverage and building heights in the four identified areas north of the railroad tracks, as depicted on Sheets L01 and L02. Area 4, west of the Millrace includes a maximum building coverage of 15% and a 45-foot height limit; area 5 includes a maximum building coverage of 0.5% and a 15-foot height limit, with recreational fields limited to 45% coverage; area 6 includes a maximum building coverage of 16% and 37- foot height limit; and area 7, which includes the river and Mill Race protective area, prohibits all 7 The staff report also notes that following development of any structures, the UO must demonstrate continued compliance through the UO’s annual Parking Code Compliance Report. Staff explain that each year the UO submits to the city a Parking Code Compliance Report that includes that annual analysis of student enrollment and automobile parking spaces on campus. The intent of the report is to measure continued compliance with the city’s land use code for required parking, based on the City’s acceptance of a 1997 study the UO used to justify a 50% reduction in required parking spaces. Hearings Official Decision (CU 18-1; WG 18-2) 12