East Campus University of Oregon (CA 25-02, RA 25-01, Z 25-03) <br />Findings Page 5 of 36February 2026 <br /> <br /> <br />The Council finds that the University’s proposal is site-specific under the City Code because all <br />of the land that would be subject to changed development rules is within a small geographic <br />area, is owned by the University and is zoned as Public Land. This finding is the Council’s <br />interpretation of City Code. <br />The Council also finds that the City’s Type IV and Type V processes are not meaningfully <br />different in terms of public process. Both procedures require similar public notice, the same <br />sequence of Planning Commission and City Council public hearings and the same public <br />opportunity to participate in those hearings. The Type IV procedure arguably provides greater <br />rights to opponents such as FNA because it requires the City to follow state standards for quasi- <br />judicial proceedings. <br />The Council further finds that FNA and other opponents have had ample notice and opportunity <br />to make their views heard in this proceeding, and to provide evidence and argument to support <br />their views. The record reflects that the University has been engaged with FNA on the <br />University’s East Campus and Next Generation Housing Plan since at least July 2023. The <br />University held the required neighborhood pre-application meeting for its land use proposal on <br />September 23, 2024. The University then filed its application in March 2025 and that <br />application was thereafter available for review on the City’s online permitting database. FNA <br />began submitting arguments to the City against the University’s proposal in October 2025, and <br />submitted a total of five rounds of written testimony totaling approximately 90 pages of <br />argument to the City between October 2025 and February 2026. FNA’s members also provided <br />extensive oral testimony to both the Planning Commission and the Council. FNA members <br />coordinated their oral testimony to the Council in order to maximize speaking time and <br />thoroughly cover their issues. <br />Although FNA asked the Council to pause the application process, FNA did not indicate what <br />additional evidence FNA would submit if given more time. The Council finds that FNA has made <br />exhaustive arguments in support of their positions and therefore that additional time for <br />advocacy is not warranted. The Council finds that the University and the community have an <br />important interest in timely City decision-making regarding the development of needed <br />housing. The Council finds that FNA and other opponents’ advocacy in the land use process has <br />resulted in modifications to the University’s proposal to incorporate changes desired by the <br />opponents, and therefore that the Type IV process has functioned appropriately in this case. <br />2. Modification of proposal <br />EC 9.7450 allows the Council to approve a Type IV application with modifications. As noted <br />above, the University has proposed changes to its application in response to advocacy from <br />FNA and other opponents. These changes have the effect of reducing the scope of the <br />ordinance, particularly with regard to changes to the text of the Refinement Plan (i.e. there are <br />fewer changes to the text than originally proposed). The Council finds that it is appropriate to <br />approve the University’s application with these changes because they are responsive to the <br />issues raised by opponents.