Hearings Official Public Hearings

AGENDA Meeting Location: Harris Hall Lane County Services Building Phone: 541-682-5377 125 East 8th Avenue https://www.eugene-or.gov/406/Hearings-Official Eugene, Oregon The Eugene Hearings Official welcomes your interest in these agenda items. Feel free to come and go as you please at any of the meetings. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM assistive-listening devices are available or an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours notice. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at (541)682-5481. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2018 (5:30 p.m.) I. PUBLIC HEARING ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WILLAMETTE GREENWAY PERMIT U of O North Campus (CU 18-1, WG 18-2) Assessor’s Map: 17-03-32-24 Tax Lots: 5300, 5400 and 5500 17-03-32-21 Tax Lot: 300 17-03-32-14 Tax Lots: 100, 103, 105, 1400, 1600, 1800, 2000, 2200, 2300, 2400, 2500, 2600, and 2700. Location: North of Franklin Boulevard, between Moss and Kincaid Streets. Request: Conditional Use Permit and Willamette Greenway Permit for future development of the University of Oregon North Campus area (Riverfront Research Park). Development includes new buildings and parking structures for education and research purposes, recreational fields, pedestrian and bicycle pathways and crossings, vehicular circulation enhancements, and enhancements and restoration of riparian areas along the Willamette River and Millrace. Applicant: University of Oregon Applicant’s Representative: Colin McArthur, Cameron McCarthy Lead City Staff: Nick Gioello, Associate Planner Telephone: (541) 682-5453 E-mail: ngioello@eugene-or.gov Public Hearing Format: 1. Staff introduction/presentation 2. Public testimony from applicant and others in support of application. 3. Comments or questions from interested persons who neither are proponents nor opponents of the proposal. 4. Public testimony from those in opposition to application. 5. Staff response to testimony. 6. Questions from Hearings Official. 7. Rebuttal testimony from applicant. 8. Closing of public hearing. The Hearings Official will not make a decision at this hearing. The Eugene Code requires that a written decision must be made within 15 days of close of the public comment period. To be notified of the Hearings Official’s decision, fill out a request form at the public hearing or contact the lead City staff as noted above. The decision will also be posted at https://www.eugene-or.gov/406/Hearings-Official.  Atrium Building 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone: 541-682-5377 Fax: 541-682-5572 www.eugene-or.gov/planning CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/WILLAMETTE GREENWAY PERMITSTAFF REPORT Application File Name (Numbers): UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) Applicant’s Request: Conditional Use Permit and Willamette Greenway Permit for future development of the University of Oregon North Campus area (Riverfront Research Park). Development includes new buildings and parking structures for education and research purposes, recreational fields, pedestrian and bicycle pathways and crossings, vehicular circulation enhancements, and enhancements and restoration of riparian areas along the Willamette River and Millrace. Applicant /Owner: University of Oregon Applicant’s Representative: Colin McArthur, Cameron McCarthy Landscape Architecture and Planning Lead City Staff: Nicholas Gioello, Associate Planner, Phone: (541) 682‐5453 Subject Property/Location/Size: Assessor’s Map 17‐03‐32‐24, Tax Lot 5300, 5400, and 5500 Assessor’s Map 17‐03‐32‐21, Tax Lot 300; Assessor’s Map 17‐03‐32‐14, Tax Lots 100, 103, 105, 1400, 1600, 1800, 2000, 2200, 2300, 2400, 2500, 2600, and 2700. Located at 1149, 1307, 1383 and 1387 Franklin Boulevard; 1600, 1650 and 1900 Millrace Drive; and 855 Riverfront Parkway. Combined properties total approximately 77.4 acres (3,371,544 square feet) in area. Existing Zoning: S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone with /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Relevant Dates: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Willamette Greenway (WG) applications submitted February 26, 2018; applications deemed complete on July 17, 2018; public hearing date scheduled for September 12, 2018. ______________________________________________________________________________ UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 1 Purpose of Staff Report Staff reports provide community members an opportunity to learn more about the land use request and to review staff analysis of the application. Staff reports are available seven days prior to the public hearing (see EC 9.7320). The staff report provides only preliminary recommendations and information. The Hearings Official will also consider additional public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before making a decision on the application. Eugene Hearings Official’s Role The Eugene Hearings Official serves our community in a “quasi‐judicial” (judge‐like) role to make decisions on individual land use applications in the context of Eugene’s Land Use Code. The first step is a public hearing, during which the Hearings Official will have an opportunity to hear from any interested parties who wish to provide testimony, including new evidence. Following the hearing, the Hearings Official will consider the testimony and evidence before making a decision. The Hearings Official’s written decision on the application is generally made within 15 days following close of the public record, following the public hearing (see EC 9.7330). For reference, the quasi‐judicial hearing procedures applicable to this request are described at EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095. Staff Role City of Eugene Planning staff will be present at the public hearing to assist the Hearings Official. Staff may provide advice and recommendations based on their professional expertise and familiarity with the application and record of materials to date; the Hearings Official may choose whether or not to follow staff’s recommendations at his or her discretion. Staff also serves as a contact for applicants, neighbors, and other interested parties. In this role, staff often hears from the people who may be directly impacted by a particular project or decision. When concerns are raised, staff works to help people better understand how to frame a concern in terms of the approval criteria. Staff listens carefully to all concerns, seek to fully understand the issues and impacts of land use applications, and attempt to provide the best service possible to everyone involved. While all issues are important, staff also makes every effort to help our community understand that all land use decisions must be made based on the approval criteria located in the Eugene Code and our community’s adopted plans and policies. Background and Present Request The subject property is comprised of 17 tax lots with a total of approximately 77.4 acres of land. This area is commonly referred to as the North Campus or Riverfront Research Park and is owned by the University of Oregon (UO), making up approximately 25 percent of the UO’s nearly 300‐acre campus. The area is north of the remainder of the UO campus, and is bordered by Franklin Boulevard to the south, between Moss Street and Kincaid Street, and the Willamette River to the north. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 2 The property is zoned S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone with /WR Water Resources Conservation overlay. Following the City’s adoption of the Riverfront Park Study in 1985, the site was zoned S‐RP as part of implementation of the plan. A conditional use permit (CU 88‐16) was approved for a 20 year master plan for the site. This conditional use permit has since expired. The /WR overlay was applied to the property in 2006 because the Willamette River and the Millrace were identified as significant resources in the context of Statewide Planning Goal 5. The entire site also falls within the boundary of the Willamette River Greenway. The Union Pacific Railroad runs through the entire length of the property, dividing the area into “north” and “south” of the railroad tracks, as further referenced in this staff report. The area north of the tracks contains remnants of a riparian river edge, large open grassy areas, a pedestrian/bike path, two physical education and recreation fields, and access to the Frohnmayer Bridge which spans the Willamette River. The proposed area for consideration with this application is shown below located between the Willamette River and Franklin Boulevard: The area south of the railroad tracks contains a mix of University and research park uses, including the University’s central power station and other buildings related to the operations of the University, fine art studios, the Urban Farm, University research, buildings that were developed as part of the Riverfront Research Park, parking lots, and a bike path along the Millrace. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 3 Northwest of and adjacent to this site is recently acquired City property (known as the Downtown Riverfront/EWEB property) with an abandoned steam plant and warehouse, slated for future commercial and residential development. Neighborhood/Applicant Meetings, Application Referrals and Public Hearing Notice On November 8, 2018, the applicant held a neighborhood/applicant meeting to provide neighbors an opportunity to review the proposal, share information, and identify issues regarding the proposal, as required by EC 9.7007. A second neighborhood/applicant meeting was held on January 11, 2018. In addition, as detailed in their written narrative, the applicant held multiple focus group meetings, information sharing meetings and Campus Planning meetings. On February 26, 2018, the applicant submitted the CUP and WG applications. Staff reviewed the applications for completeness and deemed the applications incomplete on March 28, 2018, requesting additional information. The applicant provided additional information on June 22, 2018 and staff deemed the applications complete on July 17, 2018. Referral notices were sent to various City departments and other agencies on July 24, 2018. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners in the affected area on August 24, 2018. As of the writing of the staff report, staff has received testimony from citizens both in opposition and support of the application. Various public testimony in opposition to the application cites the following issues and concerns:  Overall impacts to the river and ecosystem;  Impacts to the river from artificial turf recreation fields and the use of petro‐ plastic/chemical base, and heat effect on nearby vegetation from artificial turf;  Impacts on migratory birds adversely affected by night lighting of the recreation fields;  Loss of habitat to a large numbers of birds that use the current natural playing fields if they are replaced with artificial turf;  Area north of the railroad tracks should be preserved as an environmental outdoor laboratory and research park;  Proposed uses would limit access to the river;  Thirty year length of CUP is too long and should be 10 to 15 years;  More pedestrian and vehicular connections are needed, both north of the tracks and to connect to the old EWEB property to the north. Various public testimony in support of the application cites the following reasons:  The proposal activates the riverfront land and revitalizes the area;  The addition of sports facilities will facilitate active lifestyles;  Improved riverfront is a benefit to residents and tourists for active and passive recreation opportunities, enhanced scenic experience, and improved river access;  Increased community engagement with students and the general public;  Restoration and protection of a key riparian area, which will also improve water quality;  Providing safe and enjoyable river recreation access; UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 4   Creating a natural area for legitimate recreation opportunities may decrease illegal camping and drug use along the riverbank;  Support for the increased 200 foot riverbank setback; All testimony received prior to this report will be forwarded to the Hearings Official for consideration in making a decision on the CUP and WG applications. Any written testimony received after the date of this report but prior to the public hearing will also be forwarded to the Hearings Official. Public testimony, written or otherwise, may also be presented at the public hearing on this matter. Evaluation The Hearings Official is required to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type III land use application (See EC 9.7330). The decision must be based on, and be accompanied by, findings that explain the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision. It must also state the facts relied upon in rendering the decision, and explain the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth. To assist the Hearings Official in rendering a decision on the application, staff presents the following criteria (shown below in bold typeface), with findings related to each, based on the evidence available as of the date of this staff report. Staff has also provided a recommendation to the Hearings Official following the staff evaluation, below. Conditional Use Permit 9.3725 S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone Review Procedures. The master site plan for developments proposed within the S‐RP zone shall be reviewed through the conditional use permit process provided in this land use code. For the purpose of this review, the following criteria shall be applied in lieu of the criteria provided in EC 9.8090 Conditional Use Permit Approval Criteria ‐ General: (1) Criteria for all Development. (a) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Metropolitan Area General Plan, Riverfront Park Study, and other applicable policy documents or functional plans. The applicant’s narrative describes how the proposal is consistent with 27 policies in the Metro Plan and 25 policies in the Riverfront Park Study. Staff notes that many of the policies listed are not seen as mandatory criteria and in some cases are actually policies intended to drive City of Eugene regulatory actions and programs. Staff incorporates the applicant’s written narrative into this staff report to the extent that the applicant has demonstrated the proposal is consistent with these non‐mandatory policies. In the following analysis, staff will focus on the Metro Plan and Riverfront Park Study policies that are considered as mandatory or significant policies that should be addressed to demonstrate consistency with the Metro Plan and Riverfront Park Study. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 5 Metro Plan Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element D.5. New development that locates along river corridors and waterways shall be limited to uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of those water features. The applicant has proposed dedicating 23 acres to conservation and an additional 7 acres to allow for expanded riparian restoration adjacent to the Willamette River, while expanding educational and recreational access to the river. The applicant proposes to concentrate the development south of the railroad tracks and away from the river. By proposing a 200‐foot setback from the river bank for buildings and recreational fields, scenic view sheds to the river will be preserved. By proposing a possible realignment of the bike path, undertaking riparian restoration as feasible, and providing more safe and clear means of access to the river, the applicant has demonstrated a commitment to improving the natural and scenic qualities of the river, while respecting the environmental quality of the site. Based on these findings, and to the extent the application complies with the Willamette Greenway Permit standards as discussed later in this report and incorporated by reference, the proposal is consistent with Policy D.5. Environmental Design Element E.2. Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainage‐ways shall be protected and retained to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping shall be utilized to enhance those natural features. This policy does not preclude increasing their conveyance capacity in an environmentally responsible manner. E.4. Public and private facilities shall be designed and located in a manner that preserves and enhances desirable features of local and neighborhood areas and promotes their sense of identity. E.5. Carefully develop sites that provide visual diversity to the urban area and optimize their visual and personal accessibility to residents. The applicant has indicated that the area north of the railroad tracks and adjacent to the Willamette River was previously used for industrial purposes prior to the UO’s ownership. This area contains up to 20‐feet of fill which causes the river bank to be steep. The applicant is proposing enhancement of the Willamette River bank with restoration of the riparian area adjacent to the river, by removing the fill and grading the bank back to a more natural slope, providing riparian restoration areas at a width of at least 200 feet from the top of bank in many locations. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 6 The applicant is proposing applying the required conservation area setbacks for both the Willamette River, and the Millrace, and additional setbacks for the Willamette River and Millrace outfall. Of the 42 acres between the railroad tracks and Willamette River, the applicant is proposing 80 percent of the area to be preserved as conservation area and open space, with the remaining 20 percent utilized for recreational fields and buildings. The Master Site Plan (further described in Section 5 and included in Exhibit A) commits the area between the railroad tracks and Willamette River primarily to conservation and open space opportunities and concentrates most of the potential building development south of the railroad tracks. The applicant also proposes two bike path options along the Willamette River that would either retain the existing pathway or shift it further away from the riverbank, which would allow for a larger riparian area enhancement. Two additional pedestrian and bicycle bridge crossings are proposed over the Mill Race and the railroad tracks to better facilitate recreational, pedestrian‐friendly redevelopment and accessibility of the site. In addition to substantial conservation and open recreational space and enhanced riparian areas adjacent to the Willamette River, the proposal will also expand outdoor educational uses. By imposing expanded riparian conservation areas along the riverbank and concentrating building development south of the railroad tracks, opportunities for view diversity are created. The applicant has an established Regulatory Plan (See Sheet L01), with more stringent development regulations than are required by the Eugene Land Use Code to better facilitate open space and protection of view sheds. Also of note, the applicant is proposing maximum building coverage and height limits well below what is allowed in the S‐RP zone for the area north of the railroad tracks, and limiting the building heights south of the tracks to 85 feet where no height limit is otherwise imposed. These supplementary measures, along with the proposed 200‐foot riparian enhancement setback along the river, will significantly improve and preserve visual access both to and from the Willamette River. Based on these findings, the proposal is consistent with Policies E.2 through E.5. Riverfront Park Study A. Land Use Element 4. The following uses shall be permitted in the SD district for the Riverfront Park area: a) University programs and activities. b) Uses related to the activities, research, and programs of the University of Oregon, including light industrial, research and development, and office. c) A limited range of retail and non‐retail uses permitted in the C‐I, Neighborhood Commercial District (see Appendix B, Exhibit A). d) Other retail and non‐retail uses that complement University activities. e) Multiple‐family dwellings. The applicant has indicated the proposed uses on the site will include research, academic, administrative, physical education, and outdoor recreation, education and research. By focusing UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 7 on university related programs, research and activities, the proposed uses are in accordance with this policy. The applicant has proposed only uses permitted in the special area zone. Based on these findings, the proposal is consistent with Policies A.4a through 4e. B. Environmental Element 2. The existing Millrace which passes through a portion of the study area is an important environmental and historic city feature. Development occurring in the Riverfront Park shall maintain or improve visual and bicycle/pedestrian access to and along the Millrace, expanding its use for public recreation while at the same time recognizing its role as a storm runoff channel. The proposal protects the Millrace by maintaining a 40‐foot conservation setback from the top of bank, and incorporating recommendations for improving natural vegetation around the Millrace outfall. Proposed setbacks of 200 feet are also included around the Millrace outfall to protect the area as a significant natural water feature. Proposed enhancements to the pedestrian and bicycle pathways throughout the site, including two new pedestrian/bicycle bridge crossings over the Millrace, will improve public access to the Millrace area. 3. Development occurring in the Riverfront Park area shall be designed to preserve a significant cluster of black locust, English oak, and redleaf plum trees located just east of the current location of the bicycle path. The significant cluster of trees referenced in the above policy is located almost entirely within the /WR conservation area adjacent to the Willamette River and east of where the bike path crosses under the railroad tracks (see Area 6 on Sheet L02 of the site plans). The applicant states that the future building development in that area is sited and designed to preserve this tree cluster. In addition, the proposal includes recommendations to restore and improve native vegetation, both along the riverbank and throughout the site. Preserving native trees is one method of ecological restoration, and is ensured by the protections established in the /WR overlay zone. Staff has concerns that the site plans do not contain information that specifically depicts where the existing trees are located nor include the size and variety of the trees and their critical root zones. The lack of this information makes it difficult to confirm the siting of proposed structures in this area and their impact to the trees. To preserve these trees, the following condition of approval is warranted with additional information included on the final plan set:  On the final plans, the significant cluster of trees as described in the applicant’s narrative and the Riverfront Park Study, located on the north side of the railroad tracks and east of the existing bicycle underpass, shall be depicted with size, variety and critical root zones shown. A note on the final plans shall state that future development in this area must ensure preservation of the significant cluster of trees including protection of their critical root zones. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 8 Based on these findings and recommended condition of approval, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 4. Development in the Riverfront Park area shall, when possible, maintain and enhance the public's physical access to the river and the riparian strip along its banks. Physical access to the riverbank will be maintained and enhanced. The applicant has proposed the removal of fill material from previous industrial use along the riverbank, along with the removal of invasive vegetation. The bank will be regraded to a less steep slope and a revegetated native riparian area will be reestablished. By enabling realignment of the bike path, removing fill material, providing riparian restoration and defining more safe and clear means of access to the riverbank, the proposal will facilitate physical access to the riverbank. Based on these findings, the proposal is consistent with Policies B.2 through 4. D. Public Services and Amenities Element 1. Transportation improvements shall be required in the first phases of development to ensure adequate vehicular access, including access for emergency vehicles. The site is currently developed with transportation facilities, which include public and private streets and sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle pathways and a railroad underpass along Riverfront Parkway. The existing transportation system provides adequate vehicular and emergency service access throughout the site. The proposed transportation improvements are primarily for service vehicles and private transportation, along with expansions and additional pedestrian and bicycle pathways to enhance circulation throughout the site. These improvements will be phased appropriately to ensure adequate access to the site at all times. Based on these findings and the existing transportation system, this policy is met. Based on the above findings, the proposed master plan is consistent with the applicable adopted plan. (b) Based on technical analysis (particularly with respect to transportation facilities), planned public facilities shall be shown to accommodate the requirements of the proposed development. The applicant has submitted a preliminary trip generation analysis for the North Campus area. Following the approval of the original Conditional Use permit in 1989 (CU 88‐16), the UO secured approval to develop between 1.2 million and 1.8 million square feet within the North Campus area. During that time, enrollment at UO was approximately 17,600 students and the campus had approximately 4,919,000 gross square feet of development. This equates to a ratio of 3.578 students per 1,000 gross square feet of building area. Applying this ratio to the 1989 Long‐term Development Plan produced an estimate of approximately 4,300 to 6,450 new students in the 1.2 to 1.8 million square feet of planned development. This assumed student UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 9 population suggested a daily total of 10,350 to 15,550 trips, and the gross floor area suggested a daily total of 6,445 to 9,285 trips. Under the current proposal, the UO’s current student population is approximately 21,300 students with approximately 6,642,000 gross square feet of development, or a ratio of 3.207 students per 1,000 gross square feet. Applying this ratio to the Long‐term Development Plan indicates 3,600 more students could be accommodated, and ultimately suggests 7,035 daily trips could be expected. After CU 88‐16 was approved in 1989, the North Campus area was subject to additional transportation analysis. Several improvement projects were required or recommended as the result of additional development in the area, all of which have been implemented as follows:  Franklin Boulevard and Onyx Street: Reconstruction of the intersection and signal;  Franklin Boulevard at Agate Street: Reconstruction of the intersection and signal;  Downtown/Franklin Boulevard signal systems: Implementation of optimal signal timings; including 18th Avenue and 19th Avenue in the system; and, new controllers at 18th Avenue and University Street at Alder Street;  Agate Street at 18th Street: Reconstruction of the intersection;  Agate Street at 15th Street: Reconstruction of the intersection;  11th Street and Kincaid Street: Construction of new signal. Franklin Boulevard is currently served by the EmX bus line extending from Downtown Eugene to Springfield Station. The North Campus is adjacent to a primary transit station at Franklin Boulevard and Agate Street. Additional improvements to improve the capacity and function of Franklin Boulevard were conditioned and required as part of the approved Conditional Use Permit for Matthew Knight Arena and have also been implemented. The applicant’s engineer has provided a robust transportation analysis describing the impacts of the proposed development, with particular respect to transportation facilities, including a description and discussion of the existing and proposed transportation facilities to serve the development site. The applicant’s engineer coordinated the scope of the study with City staff prior to preparing the report. City staff concurs with the scope of the traffic study and study intersections selected. Trip generation, reductions, distribution and assignment are all in accordance with industry and ITE best practice. The consultant has selected a planning horizon that corresponds with the City’s current Transportation Systems Plan. Staff agrees with the conservative approach given the long life of project implementation and alignment with the City’s long term transportation policy. The applicant has provided a detailed discussion of existing and proposed facilities to serve all transportation users, including vehicular, transit, pedestrian and bicycle. The report includes an evaluation of mobility through the planning horizon. All intersections are expected to operate above the minimum mobility standard for the area. Site access, parking and circulation are discussed. Engineering conclusions and recommendations are provided that adequately UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 10 address the proposed impacts. There is more than adequate information to demonstrate consistency with 9.3725(1)(b) from a technical transportation facility perspective. Each year the applicant submits to the City a Parking Code Compliance Report that contains the annual analysis of student enrollment and automobile parking spaces on campus. The intent of this document is to measure continued compliance with City land use codes for required parking, based on the City’s acceptance of a 1997 study used to justify a 50 percent reduction in required parking spaces. As a result, an annual review of code compliance and the review of the UO’s transportation demand management programs was required. Since this 1997 study, the UO has annually provided the necessary information as required. The trip generation resulting from the current proposal is less than that approved in CU 88‐16, and the trip generation is further offset by the major improvements to public facilities that have occurred since the approval of CU 88‐16. Along with implementation of planned improvements to accommodate the proposed development of the North Campus area, planned public facilities will accommodate the requirements of the proposed development. In addition, each structure that is submitted for building permit must submit an analysis of the parking demand for that structure in order to evaluate the use and parking demand in accordance with the Long‐term Development Plan and to demonstrate overall compliance through the annual Parking Code Compliance Report. The application materials includes mapping of potential future pedestrian crossings and/or improvements in Franklin Boulevard. The written narrative mentions a proposed overpass crossing over Franklin Boulevard to improve the pedestrian connection of the North campus with the existing university campus south of Franklin Boulevard. The site plans (sheet L03) show an arrow across Franklin Boulevard just east of the intersection with East 11th Avenue. Franklin Boulevard right‐of‐way is outside of the boundary of the S‐RP zone. Planning and Public Works staff notes that any approval of the proposed CUP does not approve or vest a pedestrian overpass or any other type of crossing within the Franklin Boulevard right‐of‐way. Any future crossing or improvement to Franklin Boulevard will need to conform to Eugene Code Chapter 7 requirements and is subject to Public Works review and approval. Based on the above findings, this criterion is satisfied. (c) The proposed development shall protect visual access from main entry points from Franklin Boulevard to the river/riparian vegetation. To facilitate riparian restoration, open space improvements, and protection of view sheds, the applicant has established a Regulatory Plan as part of the master plan (see Sheet L01), with more stringent development regulations than are required by the Eugene Lane Use Code. The applicable S‐RP zone states that at least 40 percent of that portion of the development site to be developed shall be landscaped with living plant materials, requiring the building coverage and site elements to be contained within 60 percent of the development site. For the area north of the railroad tracks, the applicant is proposing maximum building coverage well below what is allowed in the S‐RP zone. The area south of the railroad tracks will comply with the UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 11 coverage standards of the S‐RP zone. The applicant’s Regulatory Plan also includes self‐imposed building height restrictions. The S‐RP zone limits the structures within 75 feet of the top of river bank to 45 feet in height, outside of this area there is no height limit in the zoning district. The applicant proposes buildings will be set back a minimum of 200 feet from top of bank and building heights south of the tracks limited to 85 feet. Lot coverage and building heights are further restricted in the area north of the railroad tracks. The applicant has identified four areas (see Sheets L01 and L02 of the plan set) labeled as 4, 5, 6 and 7. Area 4, west of the Mill Race is identified as having a maximum building coverage of 15 percent and 45 foot height limit; area 5 is identified as having a maximum building coverage of 0.5 percent and 15 foot height limit, with recreational fields limited to 45 percent; area 6 is identified as having a maximum building coverage of 16 percent and 37 foot height limit; and area 7 is identified as the river and Mill Race protective area with no buildings allowed. The following condition of approval is warranted regarding building coverage and height limitations proposed by the applicant to protect visual access from Franklin Boulevard to the river:  For the area north of the railroad tracks, the four areas as identified on Sheets L01 and L02 of the approved plan set shall have the following limitations: o Area 4 (west of the Mill Race): maximum building coverage is limited to 15 percent and maximum building height is limited to 45 feet; o Area 5: maximum building coverage is limited to 0.5 percent and maximum building height is limited to 15 feet; o Area 6: maximum building coverage is limited to 16 percent and maximum building height is limited to 37 feet; o Area 7: the Willamette River and Mill Race protective area shall have no buildings. By maintaining current access points and adding additional access points from Franklin Boulevard, as well as electing to impose building coverage and height limitations that are more stringent than allowed by code, the applicant has demonstrated a commitment to protecting visual access through regulation of building mass and scale. The proposal does not involve changes to the project area that negatively affect visual access from main entry points from Franklin Boulevard such as Riverfront Parkway. Based on the above findings and recommended condition of approval, this criterion is satisfied. (2) Criteria for Development Within Willamette Greenway Boundaries. (a) Compliance with the criteria in EC 9.3725(1) Criteria for all Development above. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with EC 9.3725(1)(a‐c) as discussed previously and UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 12 incorporated by reference herein. It is noted that the proposed development is within the Willamette River Greenway and is also zoned with the /WR Water Resources Conservation overlay. EC 9.3725(2) details the criteria for development within the Willamette Greenway boundary. As relevant here, staff believes this criterion is met to the extent that the proposed development and uses are allowed in the applicable S‐RP zone, and otherwise found to be consistent with the natural resource protections afforded through the Willamette Greenway Permit criteria as well as requirements of the /WR overlay zone. Those requirements in EC 9.8815 and EC 9.4900 through EC 9.4980 are locally adopted regulations that implement Statewide Planning Goals 5 and 15 and to the extent that the applicant demonstrates compliance with the criteria established in EC 9.3725(2) for development within the Willamette Greenway Boundary, this criterion is met. (b) The height and bulk of the proposed development shall be designed to consider the impacts on public open space, especially the buffer strips along the Willamette River and Millrace, and to adhere to the height limitations specified along the Willamette River. Building setbacks shall be varied to avoid the effect of a continuous wall along the minimum setback line and to adhere to the requirement for protection of designated features (i.e., Millrace and pedestrian linkage to the Autzen Stadium footbridge). As previously noted in EC 9.3725(1)(c), and incorporated by reference herein, the applicant has established a Regulatory Plan (Sheet L01) with more stringent development regulations than are required by the Eugene Land Use Code to facilitate riparian restoration, open space improvements, and protection of view sheds. The applicant is proposing maximum building coverage well below what is allowed in the S‐RP zone for the area north of the railroad tracks, as well as limiting building height in most of this area below the height limitation of the Eugene Land Use Code. The S‐RP zone limits the structures within 75 feet of the top of river bank to 45 feet in height, outside of this area there is no height limit in the zoning district. The applicant has proposed buildings be set back a minimum of 200 feet from top of bank and self‐imposed more restrictive building height limitations. For areas south of the tracks, the applicant has established a maximum building height of 85 feet, in order to provide building heights similar to campus buildings across Franklin Boulevard. The S‐RP zone has no height limitation for this area. Since the applicant has proposed to establish a height limit in the area south of the railroad tracks, the following condition of approval is warranted:  In the area south of the railroad tracks, building heights are limited to 85 feet. Outside of the restriction of the applicant’s Regulatory Plan, it is noted that the open space preservation within the site is also supplemented by additional state regulations. The Willamette River adjacent to the development site is identified as a Goal 5 Water Resource. The Willamette River is a Category A resource, with a required 100‐foot setback. In addition, the Riverfront Park/Millrace is a Category A Wetland on the Goal 5 Inventory, with a required 50 foot setback. Both of these setbacks have been incorporated in site design. In addition, UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 13 protection of significant riparian vegetation is ensured through existing established /WR protection provisions in EC 9.4900 through EC 9.4980, which are not affected by the proposal. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposal includes varied setbacks, that building development will not result in a continuous wall along the setback, that building coverage and heights will be limited, and that open space and riparian area conservation recommendations ensure protection of designated features. Based on these findings and recommended condition of approval, this criterion is met. (c) To the greatest possible degree, the intensification, change of use, or development will provide the maximum possible landscaped area, open space, or vegetation between the activity and the river. In addition to imposing maximum building coverage for the area north of the railroad tracks that are more stringent than those required by the Eugene Land Use Code, the applicant has proposed a 200 foot setback for riparian and riverbank enhancement along most of the length of the property. This setback is 100 feet beyond the required /WR overlay zone setback of 100 feet. It is noted that since the 200‐foot setback is determined from the top of bank, the setback equates to 250 to 300 feet as measured from the water’s edge. This setback preserves the riparian area between the river and proposed development while maximizing riparian restoration opportunities to the greatest extent possible. To ensure the 200‐foot setback is carried forward through the life of the master site plan, the following condition of approval is warranted:  The riparian setback area along the Willamette River shall be 200 feet from the top of bank as depicted in the final plans (sheets L01 through L05). While the /WR Water Resource Conservation Overlay Zone is not a setback required by Statewide Planning Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway, or specific to the above criterion, it is a useful boundary when determining the impact of a development. The applicant clearly chose not to locate its development within the setback area, and to retain and enhance the open space area between the existing bike path and river. Staff believes the applicant’s site plan and other available information showing the ample distance and existing riparian vegetation between the development and the river is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with this criterion, along with the recommended condition. Based on the above findings and recommended condition of approval, this criterion is met. (d) To the maximum extent practicable, the proposed development shall provide for protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe along the Willamette River. This means protection and enhancement of trees and understory characteristic of native vegetation within the riparian strip along the Willamette River. It also means removal, and active management to prevent reintroduction of, disturbance vegetation such as UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 14  Himalayan blackberries and English ivy. As used herein, the riparian strip means the area between the top of the river bank and the water’s edge. The applicant has proposed riparian restoration of the natural vegetative fringe along the Willamette River. The applicant has submitted a Riparian Assessment and Management Report that indicates vegetated riparian areas within the development site were historically reduced to narrow strips along the river. In order to enhance the natural vegetative fringe, the applicant’s written statement states that they will incorporate “as many applicable restoration techniques as possible as funding becomes available.” Techniques proposed will include large‐scale invasive plant removal, and removal of concrete riprap along the shoreline. Additionally, the 200‐foot riparian buffer proposed will help to preserve and enhance the riparian fringe. Based on the above findings, this criterion is met. (e) To the greatest possible degree, necessary and adequate public access will be provided to and along the river by appropriate legal means. As used in this section, the words “greatest possible degree” are drawn from Statewide Planning Goal 15 (F.3.b.) and are intended to require a balancing of factors so that each of the identified Greenway criteria is protected to the greatest extent possible without precluding the requested use. Goal 15 (C.3.j.) provides that “lands committed to urban uses within the Greenway shall be permitted to continue as urban uses.” This policy recognizes that development should occur in concert with continued public access to the river and development plans should maintain and improve physical access by the public to the river to the greatest possible degree. Physical access includes pedestrian and bicycle access along the river, and pedestrian access to the riverbank for activities such as swimming, fishing, and launching small paddle craft. Enhancement and protection of the riparian area along the river will be balanced with the need for public access to the river. The applicant has proposed improvement and possible realignment of the existing bicycle path along the river. The applicant also proposes a riparian area restoration along the river and the establishment of three pedestrian viewpoints and one paddle craft launching point along the river’s edge. The proposal will enhance the public’s physical access to the river, improve the ecological quality of the site, enhance public safety, and improve access of public facilities. Based on these findings, this criterion is met. (3) Interpretation. In the event any of the terms used in these S‐RP zone provisions require interpretation, the planning and development director shall be responsible for such interpretation. No interpretations were required; however, the applicant’s written narrative acknowledged this criterion and accepts the planning and development director’s interpretations as required, therefore this criterion is met. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 15 Section 2: Willamette Greenway Permit Evaluation EC 9.8815(1): To the greatest degree possible, the intensification, change of use, or development will provide the maximum possible landscaped area, open space, or vegetation between the activity and the river. This criterion is addressed in EC 9.3725(2)(c) as previously discussed in this staff report and incorporated herein by reference. Based on those findings and recommended condition of approval, this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(2): To the greatest possible degree, necessary and adequate public access will be provided along the river by appropriate legal means. This criterion is addressed in EC 9.3725(2)(e) as previously discussed in this staff report and incorporated herein by reference. Based on those findings, this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(3): The intensification, change of use, or development will conform with applicable Willamette Greenway policies as set forth in the Metro Plan. This criterion is addressed in EC 9.3725(1)(a) as previously discussed in this staff report and incorporated herein by reference. Based on those findings, this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(4): In areas subject to the Willakenzie Area Plan, the intensification, change of use, or development will conform with that plan’s use management considerations. The property is not located with the Willakenzie Area Plan boundaries, therefore this criterion is not applicable. EC 9.8815(5): In areas not covered by subsection (4) of this section, the intensification, change of use, or development shall conform with the following applicable standards: (a) Establishment of adequate setback lines to keep structures separated from the Willamette River to protect, maintain, preserve, and enhance the natural, scenic, historic, and recreational qualities of the Willamette Greenway. Setback lines need not apply to water related or water dependent activities as defined in the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines (OAR 660‐15‐000 et seq.). The subject property does not have an established Willamette Greenway setback line. As illustrated on the Regulatory Plan (Sheet L01), the Applicant proposes the establishment of a 200‐foot setback to keep structures separated from the river and to protect, maintain, preserve, and enhance the natural, scenic, historic, and recreational qualities of the Willamette Greenway. The Willamette River is identified on the Adopted Protection Designations for the Eugene Goal 5 Wetland, Riparian, and Upland Wildlife Habitat Inventories Map (November 14, UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 16 2005) as a Category A Stream, meaning it is designated for protection with a required 100 foot setback. In addition, the applicant proposes, and approval is conditioned upon, adherence to the applicant’s proposed 200‐foot setback from top of bank to create an expanded riparian restoration area without building and recreational field encroachments. Based on the above findings, and through establishment of the 200‐foot setback from top of bank as conditioned previously, this criterion is satisfied. (b) Protection of significant fish and wildlife habitats as identified in the Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper. Sites subsequently determined to be significant by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife shall also be protected. There are three wildlife species identified on the Metro Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper Wildlife Inventory (Figure D2) in proximity to the proposed development—the clouded salamander, the Oregon red salamander, and the western racer snake. None of the species identified are endangered or threatened. There are no significant fish or wildlife habitats identified on the subject property. A referral was sent to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and no response was received To assess the significant fish and wildlife habitats associated with the Willamette River the applicant also provided a Riparian Assessment and Management Report which found several key sensitive aquatic species, and rare species historically documented within one mile of the site: Sensitive Aquatic Species ▪ Chinook salmon – federally threatened (Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA)) ▪ Steelhead ▪ White sturgeon ▪ Western brook lamprey ▪ Pacific lamprey – species of concern (Federal ESA) Rare Species ▪ Western pond turtle – sensitive critical (State ESA) ▪ Retrorse sedge ▪ Painted turtle – sensitive critical (State ESA) ▪ Townsend's big‐eared bat – sensitive critical (State ESA) ▪ Bald eagle – sensitive vulnerable (State ESA) ▪ Bradshaw's lomatium –endangered (State ESA) ▪ Oregon chub – sensitive critical (State ESA) ▪ Bull trout (Coastal population) – sensitive critical/vulnerable (State ESA) No other documented occurrences of sensitive or rare wildlife species were found. Per the report findings, the site contains appropriate aquatic, upland, and riparian habitat to support all eight of the rare species listed above. However, significant on‐site habitat for riverbank species UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 17 is limited to the riparian corridor as shown on sheets L02 and S01 of the Site Plan. The applicant’s proposed restoration techniques of large‐scale invasive plant removal, and removal of concrete riprap along the shoreline will improve the habitat and subsequent proliferation of historically‐present land species. Since no work is proposed directly within the Willamette River, it is anticipated there will be no significant impacts to fish in the area. Based on these findings, this criterion is met. (c) Protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe along the Willamette River to the maximum extent practicable. As previously discussed in this staff report, the applicant proposes a 200‐foot riparian setback for buildings and recreational fields to allow for expanded riparian restoration beyond the required 100‐foot setback. The applicant has proposed to remove invasive vegetation and reestablish native vegetation within the setback area. In addition, protection of significant riparian vegetation in this area is ensured through the /WR protection provisions of EC 9.4900 through EC 9.4980. Based on these findings, this criterion is met. (d) Preservation of scenic qualities and viewpoints as identified in the Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper. The Metropolitan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper does not identify any scenic qualities or viewpoints on the subject site, therefore this criterion does not apply. (e) Maintenance of public safety and protection of public and private property, especially from vandalism and trespass in both rural and urban areas to the maximum extent practicable. The applicant, a public institution, owns all parcels within the subject site. All public improvements will be constructed in accordance with standards specified in EC 9.6505 and EC 9.3715. S‐RP Zone development standards are consistent with those in the land use code and also contribute to public safety and protection of public and private property. Based on these findings, this criterion is met. (f) Compatibility of aggregate extraction with the purposes of the Willamette River Greenway and when economically feasible, applicable sections of state law pertaining to Reclamation of Mining Lands (ORS Chapter 517) and Removal of Material; Filling (ORS Chapter 541) designed to minimize adverse effects to water quality, fish and wildlife, vegetation, bank stabilization, stream flow, visual quality, noise, safety, and to guarantee necessary reclamation. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 18 The proposal does not involve aggregate extraction nor will it have any impact on existing aggregate resources; therefore, this criterion does not apply. (g) Compatibility with recreational lands currently devoted to metropolitan recreational needs, used for parks or open space and owned and controlled by a general purpose government and regulation of such lands so that their use will not interfere with adjacent uses. As used in this section, the words "the greatest possible degree" are drawn from Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 15 (F.3.b.) and are intended to require a balancing of factors so that each of the identified Willamette Greenway criteria is met to the greatest extent possible without precluding the requested use. The proposal will not adversely affect any nearby recreational lands, parks and open space. The proposal does include facilities that can be made available for community use through partnership with the University of Oregon Department of Physical Education and Recreation. The existing bike path, which will be maintained and possibly realigned, will continue to provide a public recreational use on the property. Additionally, the proposed river access trails and viewpoints, and a proposed personal paddle craft launch point will enhance the recreational opportunities on the site. Based on these findings, this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(6): When site review approval is required, the proposed development will be consistent with the applicable site review criteria. The proposal does not require site review; therefore, this criterion does not apply. EC 9.8815(7): The proposal complies with all applicable standards explicitly addressed in the application. An approved adjustment to a standard pursuant to provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this land use code constitutes compliance with the standard. The above findings demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards addressed in this application. No adjustment to standards are requested or needed at this time. The approved master site plan (CU 18‐1) provides maximum coverage and building height limits that will govern future development of the site. At the time of development, future proposals must demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards, including, but not limited to: o EC 9.3715 S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone Development Standards o EC 9.4900‐9.4980 /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone o EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards To ensure future development will demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards, the following condition of approval is warranted: UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 19   All future development on the site shall adhere to and demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards of the Eugene Code including, but not limited to: EC 9.3715 S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone Development Standards; EC 9.4900‐9.4980 /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone; and EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards. Based on these findings and recommended condition of approval, this criterion is satisfied. Staff Recommendation: Based on the available evidence, and consistent with the preceding findings, staff recommends the Hearings Official grant approval of the applicant’s Conditional Use and Willamette Greenway requests, with the following conditions of approval: 1. On the final plans, the significant cluster of trees as described in the applicant’s narrative and the Riverfront Park Study, located on the north side of the railroad tracks and east of the existing bicycle underpass, shall be depicted with size, variety and critical root zones shown. A note on the final plans shall state that future development in this area must ensure preservation of the significant cluster of trees including protection of their critical root zones. 2. For the area north of the railroad tracks, the four areas as identified on sheets L01 and L02 of the approved plan set shall have the following limitations:  Area 4 ( west of the Mill Race): maximum building coverage is limited to 15 percent and maximum building height is limited to 45 feet;  Area 5: maximum building coverage is limited to 0.5 percent and maximum building height is limited to 15 feet;  Area 6: maximum building coverage is limited to 16 percent and maximum building height is limited to 37 feet;  Area 7: the Willamette River and Mill Race protective area shall have no buildings. 3. In the area south of the railroad tracks, building heights are limited to 85 feet. 4. The riparian setback area along the Willamette River shall be 200 feet from the top of bank as depicted in the final plans (sheets L01 through L05). 5. All future development on the site shall adhere to and demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards of the Eugene Code including, but not limited to: EC 9.3715 S‐RP Riverfront Park Special Area Zone Development Standards; EC 9.4900‐9.4980 /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone; and EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 20 For additional information on the above conditions, contact Nicholas Gioello, Planning Department, at 541‐682‐5453. Expiration EC 9.7340(2) and (4) provide that conditional use permit and Willamette Greenway approvals expire 18 months after the effective date of approval unless actual construction or alteration has begun under a required permit, or in the case of a permit not involving construction or alteration, actual commencement of the authorized activity has begun, unless the decision maker designates otherwise. The applicant has requested the Hearings Official approve the CUP and WG permits with a 30 year timeline to complete the proposed master plan. The applicant points out that the original CUP (CU 88‐16) was approved with a 20 year completion timeline. The applicant requests consideration regarding the unique aspects of the proposal and to prevent the need for repeated extension requests in the future. The applicant points out that the request is unique because it is for a vast area of land (77 acres), most of which the university has no definitive plans at this time and/or the funding to make improvements. The typical university capital project takes three to six years to secure funding and complete construction. Even in the unlikely event of multiple projects underway at once, full buildout for the number of projects and improvements possible in the proposed Master Site Plan would take 30 years or longer. Staff supports the applicant’s request for the reasons outlined in the applicant’s narrative as discussed above, and recommends the Hearings Official approve a 30 year timeline. Informational Items: For additional information, contact Nick Gioello, Associate Planner, City of Eugene 541‐682‐ 5453.  EWEB electric has both underground transmission lines and underground distribution lines on the north side of the railroad tracks in easements that conflict with this project. South of the railroad tracks we have both underground and overhead distribution lines that could possibly be in conflict.  The applicant should contact EWEB before proceeding with development plans on this property. For additional information, contact Brad Rudler, distribution Engineering Technician III, Eugene Water & Electric Board, 541‐685‐7334  Currently EWEB water has an existing 10 inch water main located at the northern end of Riverfront Parkway that can serve areas 5 and 6, and a 16 inch water main just north of the railroad tracks along the southern boundary that can serve area 4. UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 21  EWEB has no objection to any future development on these sites. When the water demand requirements have been determined, contact EWEB's water engineering department to determine what will be needed to serve these areas. For additional information, contact Bill Johnson, Water Engineering Technician IV, Eugene Water & Electric Board, 541‐685‐7377  The subject property contains a number of EWEB easements, some of which are developed with EWEB facilities. Staff has located 18 EWEB easements on the subject properties, four of which have been identified on the applicant's easement exhibit that was included in the submittal. These easements have been provided to the applicant so that they can be mapped on the easement exhibit and taken into consideration for site design. Mapping these easements for the purposes of site design is necessary in order to evaluate any relocation of existing electric facilities. For additional information, contact Rafael Sebba, Right‐of‐Way Associate, Eugene Water & Electric Board, 541‐685‐7710 Consistent with EC 9.7330, unless the applicant agrees to a longer time period, within 15 days following close of the public record, the Eugene Hearings Official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny this Type III application. The decision shall be based upon and be accompanied by findings that explain the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision, stating the facts relied upon in rendering a decision and explaining the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth. Notice of the written decision will be mailed in accordance with EC 9.7335. Within 12 days of the date the decision is mailed, it may be appealed to the Eugene Planning Commission as set forth in EC 9.7650 through EC 9.7685. Attachments A vicinity map is attached. The applicant’s full‐size site plans, and the entire application file, are available for review at the Eugene Planning Division offices. The Hearings Official will receive a full set of application materials for review prior to the public hearing. These materials will also be made available for review at the public hearing. For More Information Please contact Nicholas Gioello, Associate Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, at: (541) 682‐5453; or by e‐mail, at: nick.r.gioello@ci.eugene.or.us UO North Campus (CU 18‐1 and WG 18‐2) September 2018 Page 22