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 7 flow rates exceed capacity during the peak 15-minute period, even if hourly volume remains below capacity.” This can be true when the hourly flow rate is close to the capacity of a particular movement; however, the TPR analysis found that this is not currently the case on Agate Street. Notably, all analyses in the TPR analysis are based on peak 15-minute period flow rates, which makes this comment moot. These analyses find that current peak 15-minute flow rates do not cause hourly congestion on Agate Street - a finding that has been further supported by direct field observation. The applicant’s TPR analysis was prepared using parameters established by the City for relevant study intersections, study periods, regional growth rate, assumed transportation study improvements, and the performance threshold to be met. The study intersections included Agate Street at Franklin Boulevard/Riverfront Parkway, East 13th Avenue, East 15th Avenue, and East 17th Avenue. The analysis found that the intersections are projected to meet applicable City standards during the weekday PM peak hour in 2045 with proposed revisions (emphasis added). Proposed revisions include the Code Amendments, Plan Amendments, and Zone Changes. D. Compliance with the Approval Criteria, specifically EC 9.8424(1)(b) and (c) FNA asserts that the proposal does not comply with the approval criteria in EC 9.8424(1)(b) and (c), which require, for approval of a refinement plan amendment, consistency with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan and the remaining portions of the refinement plan. The proposed findings supporting the proposal (Exhibit C) demonstrate consistency with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. FNA has alleged a consistency issue with changing the refinement plan terminology from “Low Density Residential” to “Residential.” The applicant has addressed this alleged issue by accepting FNA’s request to revert to the original refinement plan text, as shown in [Exhibit A Code Amendments] and [Exhibit B Plan Amendments]. Regarding approval criterion EC 9.8424(1)(b), the refinement plan contains three sections: Introduction, Overview, and Goals; Land Use; and Transportation and Parking. The proposed amendments do not add or remove any goals in Section I. Goals for the Fairmount Special Area Study. Section II. Land Use contains five subsections: A. The Core Residential Area; B. The Franklin Boulevard Community Commercial Strip; C. The 19th and Agate Neighborhood Commercial Development; D. The Oregon Department of Transportation Lands; and E. The University of Oregon Lands. Each subsection includes an introduction, findings, policies, and proposals. The proposed amendments do not add or remove any findings or policies in subsections A through D. They are limited and surgical, focusing mostly on Section E, which encompasses the University-owned lands. Within that section, the proposal removes one policy that has been realized, and updates two others to remove obsolete content, in addition to minor terminology changes. In both written and oral testimony, FNA and opponents have described these modifications with terms such as “vast, sweeping, and gutting.” However, the evidence indicates a markedly different conclusion. Regardless, as discussed in Section F., FNA has proposed a number of text changes to the proposed refinement plan amendments that to not affect the intended outcomes of the proposal, most of which the applicant has accepted. The applicant emphasizes the Use of the Plan subsection in Section 1. which notes that the plan is a “policy framework, not a zoning code or City ordinance. It provides a