Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-30-2017 ARC Correspondence - Item 1 (Parker 1) From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Get Outlook for iOS Bergman, Katelin Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:36 PM Cox, Rebecca Fwd: Arborist Report - 71 Palomar Follow up Flagged Meeting: P� l- ( 1.17 7 .1-1 Item: �w 1 From: Davidson, Doug <4da > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:58 PM Subject: FW: Arborist Report - 71 Palomar To: Bergman, Katelin <kberaman@siocit .org> More ARC Corr From: Angela Soll [ Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:36 PM To: Davidson, Doug <ddavidson@slocity.org> Subject: Fw: Arborist Report - 71 Palomar FYi From: Ben Parker < Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 12:17 PM To: Angela Soll Subject: Arborist Report - 71 Palomar RECEIVED CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO JAN 2 5 2017 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Angela, You asked for input re: the Rincon Mitigated Negative Dec Arborist report on the 71 Palomar project. On first read though the report sounded thorough and based on a complete review of the project site and appropriate Arborist's review. Rincon Consultants has developed the environmental review documents for many projects on the Central Coast. I was impressed on first read through. However, as Matt and Scott pointed out in their comments at the last meeting, the Arborist Report was flawed with inaccuracies and false conclusions. The analysis had significantly mis-measured trees and mis-identified species. The species identification and tree measurements are all achievable facts in an arborist's report like this. These inaccuracies led to inappropriate conclusions on whether the trees were significant. To me this is a fatal flaw of the document and the city should look into getting a replacement review done that would either support or reject the Mitigated Negative Dec. status of the project based on facts. When the environmental documents are done and certified I still do not know that our evaluation is appropriate at this point. Should the Heritage Tree ordinance be used by opponents of a project to cancel it. I worry that use of the ordinance like this will result in landowners being more wary of having their tree designated as a Heritage Tree. I see the ordinance as being an incentive not a hindrance to property owners. - Ben Parker