My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Hearings Official Decision
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2018
>
CU 18-1
>
Hearings Official Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/31/2018 5:15:34 PM
Creation date
10/31/2018 5:15:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
U of O North Campus
Document Type
Hearings Official Decision
Document_Date
10/31/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
presentation, the applicant’s representatives, Colin McArthur, Mike Harwood and Emily Eng, <br />testified on behalf of the applicant. Following the applicant’s presentation, six individuals <br />2 <br />presented testimony in favor of the application and 21 individuals testified in opposition to it. <br />Following staff comments, the applicant presented rebuttal testimony. <br />At the close of the public testimony, the record was left open for a period of 21 days, until 5:00 <br />pm on October 3, 2018, for additional testimony and evidence; until 5:00 pm on October 10, <br />2018 for evidence and testimony responding to the additional testimony and evidence submitted <br />during the initial open record period; and until 5:00 pm October 17, 2018 for the applicant’s <br />rebuttal argument related to the new testimony and evidence. <br />During the first open record period, city staff submitted a memorandum proposing a revised <br />condition of approval; and additional testimony and evidence was submitted by the applicant and <br />11 individuals. During the second open record period, the department received 41 emails, <br />3 <br />including response testimony from the applicant and many emails, primarily in opposition. The <br />applicant submitted its rebuttal testimony on October 17, 2018. <br />B. Site Characteristics <br />The subject property includes 77.4 acres of land located south of the Willamette River and north <br />of Franklin Blvd. The property is owned by the UO and includes approximately 25% of the UO’s <br />nearly 300-acre campus. The subject property is at the northern edge of the UO campus and is <br />4 <br />commonly referred to as the “North Campus.” <br />The Union Pacific Railroad runs generally east to west through the entire property. The area <br />north of the railroad tracks and south of the Willamette River includes remnants of a riparian <br />river edge, large open grassy areas, a pedestrian and bike path, two physical education and <br />recreational fields and access to the Frohnmayer Bridge, which spans the Willamette River. The <br />area south of the railroad tracks includes a mix of buildings, including the University’s central <br />power station and other buildings related to university operations, fine art studios, the Urban <br />Farm, University research, buildings developed as part of the Riverfront Research Park, parking <br />lots, and a bike path. The Millrace runs through the southern portion of this area, near Franklin <br />Blvd. <br />The property is zoned S-RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone with /WR Water Resources <br />Conservation overlay. The entire site falls within the Willamette River Greenway boundary. <br />Adjacent property to the northwest is known as the “Downtown Riverfront/EWEB property,” <br />2 <br />The names of the individuals who presented oral testimony and who presented written testimony, before, during or <br />after the public hearing are on file in the City’s planning records for this application. <br />3 <br />Most of the opposition email testimony consisted of copies a form message urging support of one of three <br />‘options’ to the proposed Master Plan that had been presented at the public hearing and then repeated in a letter <br />submitted by one opponent during the first open record period. Arguably the form emails were not responsive to <br />new evidence and testimony submitted during the first open record period. However, because the content does not <br />add to any issue related to compliance with any approval criteria and, therefore, the emails are not prejudicial to any <br />other party that complied with the open record requirements, they are included in the record. <br />4 <br />A master plan for the same area was approved in 1988 as the UO Riverfront Research Park under a previous <br />conditional use permit. That master plan was only partially implemented and the conditional use permit to complete <br />development under that master plan expired in 2012. <br />Hearings Official Decision (CU 18-1; WG 18-2) 3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.