HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-30-2017 ARC Correspondence - Item 1 (Worthy 1)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Get Outlook for iOS
Bergman, Katelin
Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:37 PM
Cox, Rebecca
Fwd: 71 Palomar
Follow up
Flagged
Meeting: f\ --1r
Item: �` 1
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Davidson, Doug" <ddayidson(d),slocity.or >
Date: Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:58 PM -0800
Subject: FW: 71 Palomar
To: "Bergman, Katelin" <kber an(cr�,slocity.org>
....
From: Angela Sol[ [
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:34 PM
To: Davidson, Doug <ddavidson@slocity.org>
Subject: Fw: 71 Palomar
Xi
From: Jane Worthy <[
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 10:31 AM
To: ?
Subject: 71 Palomar
RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
JAN 2 5 2017
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Angela and Ron,
Sorry for my late response, but here you are - hastily put -together thoughts and questions re: 71 Palomar:
At the time of designation, did the City consider the building alone or the entire site historic? If the site, then
perhaps a smaller project is called for, leaving more room for existing trees.
I'd like to see the very tall Araucaria stay and the row of Ashes along the western border stay, at a minimum
The City has asked developers to adapt plans in the past tin order to save existing, less -important trees. (The
ficus next to Banana Republic on Higuera always comes to mind ...)
Thanks to Matt's and Scott's concerns about the City -ordered arborist report, I believe a new report should be
contracted.
Even though wildlife is not under our purview, the trees in which they live are. Has the City biologist weighed
in?
Thanks and happy New Year,
Jane
Jane Worthy
jape janeworthy.com
805.602.2121