East Campus University of Oregon (CA 25-02, RA 25-01, Z 25-03) <br />Findings Page 21 of 36February 2026 <br /> <br /> <br />FNA’s January 19 letter, however, also discusses two specific refinement plan policies <br />concerning traffic studies. One of these policies is Traffic Circulation Policy 5, which required <br />the City to “initiate a study of Agate Street between Franklin Boulevard and 19th Avenue.” The <br />other policy is Traffic Circulation Policy 6, which required the City to “initiate an area-wide <br />traffic calming study for the streets within the Fairmount/University of Oregon Special Area <br />Study boundary to determine appropriate mitigation for through-traffic utilizing neighborhood <br />streets.” FNA’s arguments suggest that they believe that the University’s proposed <br />amendments are inconsistent with these policies. <br />The Council interprets the refinement plan to find that these two policies are not applicable to <br />the University’s proposal because the policies are directed at the City and not the University. <br />The Council finds that there are no provisions in the refinement plan that prohibit University <br />development or prevent the City from amending the refinement plan to facilitate development <br />pending the outcome of any particular traffic study or mitigation plan. The City completed the <br />2000s era studies referenced in Traffic Circulation policies 5 and 6. <br />The Council further finds that the traffic policy applicable to the proposed amendments is <br />Traffic Circulation Policy 7, which states the conditions under which the University is required <br />to analyze and mitigate traffic impacts: <br />“If a Traffic Impact Analysis that is required by the City Code <br />projects that a proposed development will increase traffic on <br />streets within the single-family neighborhood to the east and <br />south of University-owned land the City shall require the applicant <br />to mitigate those impacts through the use of traffic calming <br />strategies or other mechanisms designed to discourage through <br />traffic.” <br />This policy demonstrates that University development in the local refinement plan area is <br />subject to the same traffic impact standards as other development in the City. The Council finds <br />that this policy undermines FNA’s argument that the University must conduct additional traffic <br />analysis and mitigation in the current plan and Code Amendment proceeding beyond the <br />requirements of the TPR and the City’s normal traffic impact analysis rules that apply later at <br />the time of application for a development project. <br />For all these reasons, the Council finds that the proposed Code Amendments are consistent <br />with the traffic-related provisions of the East Campus refinement plan. <br />EC 9.8424(2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the <br />following: <br />(a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan. <br />(b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal. <br />(c) New or amended community policies. <br />(d) New or amended provisions in a federal law or regulation, state statute, <br />state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state agency land use plan.