East Campus University of Oregon (CA 25-02, RA 25-01, Z 25-03) <br />Findings Page 3 of 36February 2026 <br /> <br /> <br />2024 Senate Bill 1537 requires the City to grant certain adjustment to residential zoning rules, <br />including an up to 20% increase in building height for middle housing units. <br />The Council finds that much of the opposition to the University’s proposal appears to stem from <br />concerns about changes to the Fairmount residential neighborhood, including concerns about <br />upzoning and increased residential density in the neighborhood. For example, FNA’s January 19 <br />letter expresses concern regarding “the potential for increased residential density throughout <br />the Refinement Plan area” including “all of the [low-density residential]-designated properties <br />within the Refinement Plan Boundary.” Similarly, Dagmar Zeithamova Demircan’s October 3 <br />testimony argued that the University’s proposal will “increase issues associated with high- <br />density housing,” and Brian and Babette Jones’ January 26 testimony argued that the “increase <br />in density of the population in the Fairmount neighborhood will stress the local businesses.” <br />The Council appreciates these concerns, but notes that the University’s proposal does not <br />change development standards within the low density residential plan area/R-1 zone. <br />Therefore, to the extent that FNA and others seek to use this proceeding to oppose increased <br />residential density in the R-1 zone, that opposition is misdirected. Increased residential density <br />in the R-1 zone is required by state middle housing laws and these laws are independent of the <br />University’s proposal at issue in this proceeding. <br />The Council finds that the University’s planned student housing, including dormitories and <br />middle housing for students qualifies as “housing” and “needed housing” under state law. The <br />state definition of “needed housing” specifically includes “[h]ousing for college or university <br />students, if relevant to the region.” ORS 197A.018(b)(H). The Council finds that housing for <br />University of Oregon students is relevant to our region given the large number of students at <br />the University in the City and the significant role that they play in the life of our community. The <br />Council therefore finds that the City must set clear and objective standards for the housing that <br />the University seeks to build through its proposed Code and Plan Amendments. <br />This means that the City may not accept FNA and other opponents’ proposals for conditional <br />use permits and site review of the University’s housing. FNA’s final argument from February 2 <br />requests that the City impose “discretionary review standards … that require[] assessment and <br />mitigation of impacts on the surrounding neighborhood” from University housing through <br />conditional use permit and site review land use processes. Other opponents similarly request <br />conditional use permitting and/or site plan review. See, e.g., comments from Catherine Bryce, <br />FNA Board member George McCully and FNA member Steve Gab. <br />The Council recognizes that the City has developed clear and objective standards for conditional <br />use permits and site review for needed housing. But these are not the type of standards <br />requested by opponents. Instead, opponents seek discretionary review for compatibility and <br />neighborhood impact issues, and related land use hearing and appeal rights. See, e.g., FNA’s <br />January 19 testimony requesting that the City “convene a work group” to consider “[m]itigation <br />of off-site impacts” and Fran Munkenbeck’s January 19 testimony requesting a conditional use <br />permit process to “ensure assessment and mitigation of impacts to the surrounding residential <br />neighborhood.” The Council finds that these types of standards are not available under state