My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Testimony (9-8-18 to 9-12-18 as of 10:00 AM)
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2018
>
CU 18-1
>
Public Testimony (9-8-18 to 9-12-18 as of 10:00 AM)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2018 4:54:48 PM
Creation date
9/12/2018 4:54:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
U of O North Campus
Document Type
Public Testimony
Document_Date
9/12/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
GIOELLO Nick R <br />From:Karen Sati Kielas <karensuwinski@hotmail.com> <br />Sent:Tuesday, September 11, 2018 12:03 PM <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:Proposed UO Riverfront Development <br />To Whom it May Concern, <br />We are homeowners in Eugene and are writing to voice our concerns that the process and <br />plans for the proposed UO development along the riverfront is not in alignment with the health <br />of our river ecosystems, or with the Eugene we'd like to see for future generations. <br />30-years is way too long. <br /> Irreparable changes and damage to the river ecosystem would take place <br />in this 30-year window and we would be stuck with the damages before we would have another <br />opportunity to make changes. <br />The University should be held accountable. <br /> The UO should be required to provide the public <br />benefits described in the Master Plan such as riverbank restoration, the bike path, etc. before other <br />development occurs north of the railroad track. The University's plan calls for the restoration "when <br />funds are available." We know the University didn't make good on its promises in the 1988 Master <br />Their plan should be <br />Plan to restore the riverfront. What makes us think they will do so this time? <br />"phased" to ensure accountability. <br />Playing fields are an inappropriate use of the riverfront. <br /> Over the last 30 years standards for <br />habitat protection have become more rigorous as scientists understand the fragility of riparian <br />ecosystems. With the uncertainties associated with climate change and an emerging awareness <br />regarding the toxicity of synthetic fields, protecting the public interest requires us to take a <br />precautionary approach to special habitat. That means no playing fields or buildings. <br />The UO should stop the clock. <br /> The UO can voluntarily stop the clock on their permit application so <br />. <br />an additional hearing can be scheduled when school is in session <br />If the University wants a 30-year <br />permit it ought to be able to able to wait a mere three or four weeks so the people most affect by the proposed <br />development (students and faculty) can fully participate in the public process. <br />Thank you, <br />Karen and Joshua Kielas <br />Eugene,, OR 97404 <br />1 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.