HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-30-2017 ARC Correspondence - Item 1 (McLean)JAN 3 0 2017
From: cc me lean <
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 5:01 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: 71 Palomar agenda item #1
PLEASE REPLACE MY PREVIOUS EMAIL WITH THIS ONE. THANK YOU.
Please forward to ARC, Mayor Harmon, City Council, Tree Committee, Planning Commission and post to all websites
relating to this project. Thank you.
Dear ARC Chair Wynn and ARC members,
After reading the revised tree evaluation by Rincon Environmental Consultants I have serious
concerns about the removal of the 55 trees at 71 Palomar to facilitate the proposed apartment
development project. This is our neighborhood's Urban Forest and a Cultural Landscape and location
of the Sandford House (1890) which is on the city's Historic Master List. It is home to many avian
species, a nesting site and a habitat to many animals.
hope that you have read Tree Committee Chair Dr. Matt Ritter's letter responding to the revised
Rincon report; it is excellent and expresses the Tree Committee's concerns. You do not have a
quality report and I am asking that you do not make a decision tonight and request an independent
Arborist's report, biology report, avian report and allow the Tree Committee to review a new study
before you make a determination. The site plan that includes the trees' location and identification was
just added yesterday and has not been reviewed to determine accuracy.
The Rincon report is a travesty and when residents asked for a thorough environmental report after
reviewing the extremely flawed reports by the developer's chosen firms, Olivera and A&T Arborists,
we were assured by our City Manager and Community Development Director that the environmental
firm chosen by the City of San Luis Obispo would produce an unbiased, accurate and quality
report. Many residents suggested that the city collaborate with an environmental group, such as the
Sierra Club, to select the consultants for this important environmental report; the request was
ignored. The one day visit by Rincon's Stephanie Lopez totally misrepresents the size and condition
of the amazing trees, avian species and nesting sites. The cultural landscape including animal
habitat surrounding the Sandford House has been totally ignored. The revised Rincon report is
erroneous and incomplete.
A real study of the avian species and habitat would take time and serious effort as required in the
Migratory Bird Act due to the variety of birds and the many changes due to their migration patterns,
numbers and nesting habits; it would require a yearlong study throughout the nesting cycle to be
accurate and acceptable.
I am sorry that our city does not forward all of the residents' many emails, letters. and public
comments presented at the meetings as part the ongoing packet that accompanies a project such as
this as it proceeds through the many city auspices, City Council, and advisory bodies. While our
hard work disappears into cyberspace, the CDD forwards prior biased reports from A&T Arborists
and Olivera Environmental hired by the developer. It appears that we are starting over at each step
of the development process as it moves from start to finish. The CDD needs to include all previous
correspondence and testimony from the residents; citizens are being shut out of the process at every
juncture. This is a serious breach of the open, inclusive and transparent governmental process
which our city government touts.
The newest report, by Rincon is unacceptable. Someone needs needs to advocate for the birds,
animals and 55 trees slated to be clear cut. This is once again a task which has fallen on the
residents. Why can't our CDD join us in living up to San Luis Obispo's designation as a "Tree City?"
How about seriously considering the effects of Climate Change and the positive function of trees
when evaluating a project such as this?
Please help us to advocate for the preservation of the Cultural Landscape and Historic Sandford
House. A redesigned project which takes into consideration the wondrous qualities of 71 Palomar
should be undertaken by the architect and developer instead of the six box -like apartment buildings
which disrespect the gorgeous site. This could be accomplished without killing the 55 trees or moving
the house and risking its survival. This is an opportunity for the city to require a quality project which
is worthy of and honors the amazing site. Please remember that you have the power to require
neighborhood compatibility and an R-4 site next to an R-1 neighborhood requires finesse and creative
design, not massive boxes and the destruction of the Urban Forest and Cultural Landscape which
anchors our northside neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Cheryl McLean
Anholm, San Luis Obispo