GIOELLO Nick R <br />From:Kathy Ging <kathy@kathyging.com> <br />Sent:Wednesday, September 12, 2018 11:24 AM <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:I oppose the current UO plan river front re-development- RE hearing today <br />I oppose the current UO plan river front re-development including the use or artificial urf, habitat <br />destruction and many other bona fide reasons why mre time and community input from <br />preservationations viewpoints should be considered. <br />The UO should be required to provide the public benefits described in the Master Plan such <br />as riverbank restoration, the bike path, etc. before other development occurs north of the railroad <br />track. The University's plan calls for the restoration "when funds are available." The University didn't <br />make good on its promises in the 1988 Master Plan to restore the riverfront. Will they do so this time? <br />T <br />heir plan should be "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 <br />riparian ecosystems.With the uncertainties associated with climate change and an emerging <br />awareness regarding the toxicity of synthetic fields, protecting the public interest requires us to take a <br />That means no playing fields or buildings. <br />precautionary approach to special habitat. <br />The UO can voluntarily stop the clock on their permit application so an additional hearing can be <br />scheduled when school is in session. If the University wants a 30-year permit it ought to be able to <br />able to wait a mere three or four weeks so the people most affect by the proposed development <br />(students and faculty) can fully participate in the public process. Thank you for denying this re- <br />development. <br />~-~ ~-~ <br />Kathy Ging, M.A., G.R.I.541-342-8461 Email: kathy@kathyging.com <br />1 <br /> <br />