I would like to point out a few items that the article on proposed work on Poplar Street (Review, May 22) did not cover.
One of the main concerns being expressed at the meeting was not the intent of City Council, which is correctly stated as reflecting the community’s wishes to save the trees on Poplar and to improve safety for pedestrians and bicycles given the increase in traffic with the addition of the light on Poplar. Nor was it a debate over the stated intent of the Public Works director or city engineer for the same goal. The concern was a reward of $156,000 to the identified company (CSW).
Despite the stated goals for the preservation of the trees, CSW, in its response for the proposal, had proposed five options for the road, all of which were 60-foot roads. Nowhere in the proposal did it mention the goal was to save the trees. In fact, there was a specific statement that there would be outreach to the community to mollify “concerns regarding tree removal.” (Please see Attachment 2 on the city’s website for May 7 meeting.)
The environmental planner for CSW has worked on a project that had intended to destroy the historical Niles Canyon Railroad.
The neighborhood has already seen how planning by developers can “evolve” standard arborist principles and result in damage or loss of heritage trees, and it is not a leap to imagine that a company with 60-foot roads as its starting image might be inclined to “evolve” an arborist to declare trees with future lives of hundreds of years to be on the brink of death.
— Beth Squiers, Half Moon Bay
Note, this version corrects the spelling of the writer's name.