Public Testimony Batch 15 - through 5:00pm on 2026-02-10

University of Oregon February 10, 2026 RA 25-01, CA 25-02, Z 25-03 Final Open Record Submission 4 EC 9.7605, recognized neighborhood associations have standing to appeal any land use decision in their neighborhood. Except for subdivision and partition approvals, the City does not charge a fee for a neighborhood association’s appeal of a Type II Planning Director decision. Neighborhood associations also qualify for a 50% reduction in the fee charged for appealing a Type III Hearings Official decision. ORS 227.178 allows cities 120 days to review and make a final decision on land use applications such as these, following a determination of completeness. The completeness review period is typically 30 days. The applicant notes that the State has mandated, and the City has implemented, provisions for expedited land use review of housing proposals, as well as mandatory adjustments (in response to SB 1537). The applicant has not assessed the applicability of these provisions and processes to future development proposals; standard application and completeness review timelines are used. Regarding Conditional Use Permit approval, EC 9.8090 states that “[c]conditional use permits apply to the initiation or expansion of a use listed as being subject to the conditional use permit review process in this land use code.” Currently, as detailed in the application, all uses proposed by the University are permitted outright in the PL zone under the City Code. The only uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit in the PL zone are select uses listed in EC 9.2682(2) on land not owned and operated by a public agency. As detailed in the application, the applicant plans to own and operate all future housing development sites. Notwithstanding an evaluation of whether this requirement would discourage needed housing through cost and delay, implementing FNA’s proposal, which requires Conditional Use Permit approval for residence halls, would necessitate new amendments to the PL zone and additional amendments to the Refinement Plan that are beyond the scope of the applicant’s proposal and unsupported by the findings. Additionally, to implement this requirement, the City would need to make findings justifying why new residence halls require special consideration in the PL zone, given that there are currently four existing residence halls within the PL zone and Refinement Plan boundary, and one under construction that did not require special consideration prior to construction. Regarding Site Review approval, staff notes that it is currently required in the PL zone when the project is within 300 feet of residentially zoned land and meets the thresholds for a Traffic Impact Analysis, in accordance with EC 9.8670. We understand that FNA would like to subject all developments in the LI plan area to Site Review approval. However, like Conditional Use Permits, implementation would require changes outside the scope of the proposal and not supported by the findings. Additionally, FNA cites ORS 197A.400(1), which allows cities to adopt and apply alternative approval processes to housing development if they authorize a density at or above the zone's authorized density and meet two other conditions. This section does not apply to the proposal because, unlike the Residential zones, the PL zone does not regulate density. Therefore, the City cannot adopt a process whose purpose is to exceed a threshold that does not exist. We understand that FNA would like to subject residence halls and new housing developments to land use compatibility review with the surrounding neighborhood. Oregon has passed a broad slate of housing-focused legislation in recent years, aimed at increasing production, reducing regulatory barriers, supporting affordability, and stabilizing vulnerable populations. Specifically, Senate Bill (SB)