HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc - Gould (71 Palomar)y
R�:�{_�'El` I/,.as i
.JAN 2017
f 7 K
From: Kit Gould-Himelblau <
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 2:00 PM
To: Advisory Bodies; Combs, Ron; Davidson, Doug; Cohen, Rachel
Cc: Harmon, Heidi; Rivoire, Dan; Christianson, Carlyn; Gomez, Aaron; Pease, Andy
Subject: Regarding trees at 71 Palomar
Please forward this email onto the Tree Committee Members and the Architectural Review Commission
Members.
Dear Ron Combs, Doug Davidson, Rachel Cohen, Tree Committee Members, and Architectural Review
Commission Members,
I am writing to you ask for clarification and justification of a situation I don't understand. This is in regards to
the review process for the removal of 50+ trees at 71 Palomar. In the draft of minutes for the December 12th
Tree Committee it states that Rachel Cohen said the ARC will have the final decision on what will happen to
the trees. I find it strange that an Architectural Review Commission would be the agency to grant or deny tree
removal. I had thought that was one of the main functions of the Tree Committee. Why has this power been
taken away from the Tree Committee?
Also, I noticed that in the December 12th Tree Committee minutes that TC members stated that there
"inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the consultant arborist report," and that the ARC should disregard the
report. Looking at the agenda items for the ARC it looks like Rincon has made some adjustments to their initial
report. Has the Tree Committee been given an opportunity to review the adjusted report before the ARC uses
the Rincon report to come to a decision about the trees?
I appreciate the work our committee and commission members do and I believe that they care about qualities of
the city that most citizens want protected.
Thank you for your time and service,
Kit Gould