My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0798.001 2018-2020
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2018-2020
>
COM 0798.001 2018-2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2020 10:47:15 AM
Creation date
3/6/2020 9:45:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2018-2020
Communication
0798
Point
001
Author
Michael Yee, Planning Director
Communications - Referred To
FC
Document Relationships
AGE PC 2020/07/07 (2018-2020)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2018-2020\Planning Committee (PC)
AGE PC 2020/07/21 (2018-2020)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2018-2020\Planning Committee (PC)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
JACKSON: Yes. <br /> TAI: I think I received it on January 30th, which is a few days ago. <br /> JACKSON: Okay. <br /> TAI: And I questioned that, too. I send some questions, because again there's no explanation on <br /> the diagrams, and I said please explain,because I need to get Mr. Barrios involved if I have no <br /> more detail. But, that was only a few days ago. Of course, it would not be included in here. <br /> JACKSON: Okay, so I think you partly answered my question. I was going to ask do you plan <br /> to hire an arborist to evaluate the trees that were subject to that violation, and how do you plan to <br /> resolve the January 2020 violation? <br /> TAI: January 20th? Or January 28th <br /> JACKSON: Yes, January 28t1', 2020. <br /> TAI: January 281h letter I did not get until January 30th. Today is February 6th, okay? As soon <br /> as I got that letter, I look at it, I couldn't understand it, because there is no explanation, okay? <br /> Just some diagram, okay, so two days ago, I sent an email to Public Works. I said please give <br /> me some written explanation what this is about. So, I'm waiting for that. I can assure you if <br /> indeed those are trees that would pose imminent danger, I will have them removed. Most likely, <br /> I will take the second option which is in lieu of removing, I will have an arborist produce a letter, <br /> and even if I take the second option,most likely I'll do the first option even though I'm required <br /> because I just want to do it. Would that answer your question? But, keep in mind, I just got it on <br /> the 30th which Js a few days ago. <br /> YEE: So,before you moved onto the second to here, you said, you felt like you had resolved <br /> the violation issues. You felt like it was settled, that you've done everything to settle it. I would <br /> then question that it may be a little premature to say the issues around the violations are settled. <br /> TAI: I don't understand that. First, we're talking about two violations. One was issued back in <br /> June; one I received a few days ago. The few days ago, of course,that has not been resolved, <br /> because I'm asking questions,;and"they have not answered my questions yet. I said just explain <br /> to me what this diagram means. No, in written form, okay? So, to answer your question, the <br /> second one has not been resolved, because I just received it. The first one, I maintain that I have <br /> complied because you said in lieu of removal, you produce the letter. Instead of producing a <br /> letter, I produced a 30-page or 35-page detailed analysis, and also I said I would do everything <br /> that is identified. <br /> JACKSON: Let me rephrase the question into a yes or no answer. Can you provide the <br /> Planning Commission the assurance that if you hire an arborist and they determine that there are <br /> unsafe trees on the property, you will remove them? <br /> DRAFT <br /> 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.