Brief is that it had been our plan to retain the five trees. We actually included the original planting plan that showed all five of those trees. So, as a result of the Due Diligence process that we went through and determined that we had a significant lead soil issue, we worked on trying to come up with a plan essentially for how to mitigate it. We had to submit a plan to the department of Public Health and there was a lot of work done to try to figure out exactly what we were gonna do. We had to do something. We either had to off haul all the soil or we had to find a way to contain it on site. We were actually given the ability by dph to retain the soil on site. And the difference in pricing for us to either off haul it or to retain it on site is a difference of about 2. 68 million was the pricing we got from the contractors. At bid the point that we executed our contract based on what we got documented in the package to you, that was 1. 9 million. Thats a pretty significant delta. Obviously, westside courts is the second oldest Public Housing site in the city. It was built in 1943 i believe. And it requires a lot of work and the budget is over 40 million for rehab. Clearly there were better uses for those scarce resources to put them into the buildings. So, basically, what i wanted to show you, which is included in your package. I clicked on it. President honda there you go. So in the package we actually included the landscape plan. This is actually the soil Management Plan thats actually an exhibit to the site mitigation plan approved by dph. This is actually how we plan to implement the program to retain the soils on site. I color coded this just to make it easier, although its hazey, given the scan. Basically, weve got four conditions on site. The yellow locations are locations where we basically can maintain grade. We have to grub the soil to get rid of weeds, but basically thats essentially level. Were not moving any soil in these locations, although the grub material might have to find a place. Weve got the orange locations. Those are actually locations where the excavations actually going to a depth of two feet. And the blue locations are locations where were ebbixcavag to a level of six inches. Rain locations are retention locations where basically were building up curbs in order to allow us to keep the soil on site. So were raising the level of the grade in those locations behind newly constructed curbs. And those are happening at ten different locations. And basically the two so then the three that are at the bottom, the bottom of the site is actually post street. The south is sutter street. The left is baker street. Basically, weve got three large locations on sutter, three large locations on post. Two smaller locations at baker and then two additional locations that are also on sutter. So the five trees that are in question are located in these locations. So what i also provided is that this is the detail from the landscape drawing. Why isnt it on . So this is actually the detail for the berm locations. Basically weve got a retaining wall on the left. Youve got mounded up dirt. And where the blue is representing an existing tree. The bottom of that, the hash, is the existing grade. So thats existing grade for these trees. The dirt thats being mounded, obviously, will create an impact both in terms of circulation of water and air and will damage the trees, as was documented in the exhibit that we attached, which was morris summary of the impact that was sent, that this particular Retention Program would have on these trees. At the bottom is what you cant see because the scroll is actually the ideal installation for new tree. Thats having the root ball actually at grade where it can get moisture, sun, just available nutrients as opposed to how what will happen as a result of the retention plan. So theres more, but essentially thats the gist. The gist is were trying to basically retain the soils on site and the impacts will be deleterious to this waste. President honda thank you. Mr. Buck . Good evening. Happy new year. Chris buck, urban foresty. Im going to spend most of my time talking about the condition of the trees. The timeline here is that we did a 30 day public notification from june 26 to september 26. And during that 30 day period, our staff put the removal notices on the subject trees. On the posting it did state that the reason for removal was the issue about mitigating the soil. I dont know why the inspector didnt add Additional Information about the trees being in Poor Condition as well. We had a public works hearing on september 25th because the matter was protested during the 30 day notification period. At our public works hearing we did establish that the trees also were in Poor Condition. That was part of our reason for the park approval. Based on what, significant trees are trees that are tree like street trees. They are protected to be protected by the street tree. Theyre on private property, but within ten feet of a public right of way. If i could go to the lap top now, im just gonna go through some photos to demonstrate the conditions of the trees. Tree number one on baker is a species thats very sensitive to root disturbances. And to the lay person, when you look at a tree like this, it probably looks somewhat normal. Multiple branchs. Its got leaves. The trees themselves are vigorous, so the vigor is not in question. But if you look more closely, these trees, all of the trees were topped at one point and regrew in sort of a witchs broom where they sprout out from the original topping cut. Topping cuts are an open path way to insects, disease and decay. And decay, over time, reduces the strength of the wood and causes stems to fail. And so this tree that we were just looking at has a pocket of decay in the center of the trunk. Its also located at the base of where all the main stems join. Thats a weak point within the tree. Heres a closeup of some of that decay. Tree number two on baker is an eucalyptus. Its not a blue gum eucalyptus. They tend to have better stem strength. They have fewer branch failures. Silver doing hrar eucalyptus grow very strongly. We found theres evidence of stem failures and also old topping cuts. That was once the top of the tree where its circled now. After that dramatic topping cut, stresses the tree, the tree responds by putting out new branchs. And theyre literally just weakly attached which can be around that old decay point. Heres another view of tree number two on baker and another large sign of decay there. Tree number one on post has an lean. It has a low tolerance of root disturbance. And there is a sidewalk repair thats required out there, so the impact to the root system here would be to really destablize the tree potentially. We used to plant a lot of trees and they just keep dropping on us, even when we dont prune the roots. Just wanted to. Out the tree protection thats in place. Since mr. Williams contacted us the day after the hearing, we contacted the contractor immediately and within a few weeks we had all the trees protected. Theyve been protected well over the last since mid october. Again, this tree was topped and the structural the resulting structure is very poor. It also has an lean. This is the one with the sidewalk damage. In addition, its leaning against a guy wire. To some degree is being supported by those lines. On post street, tree number two also has a lot of structural issues. Again, it was topped many, many years ago. And the resulting growth has included bark with codominant stems. A high likelihood for failure. You can see in these images where the old topping cuts occurred and the new sprouts formed right around them. Theres decay right in the center of that. Thats where we typically see a lot of branch failures. The last tree to review is on sutter street. Its also an ecacia. Low tolerance for root disturbance. This tree again was topped. Meaning about 20 feet in height it was cut haphazardly. Probably 20, 30 years ago. This tree has signs of decay as evidenced by this genaderma fungus. Its a good decay, fungi. Also, this is a compelling photo. This shows how where the original branch was once cut, these two big stems that come up on the sides is the reaction. Very poorly attached. And basically with rotting wood between them. So when we reviewed the condition of the trees, regardless of whether theres excavation and now weve learned that theyre looking to mound, the bottom line from the bureau of urban forestry are the trees are in poor structural condition. These are not trees i would recommend starting to elevate soil around or start creating wells around the base of the trunk to keep the root dry. Adding soil above the existing grade reduces oxygen to the roots and reduces water to get to the roots. And these trees were approved for removal by the department because they are in Poor Condition. The only knock i would say against the on site contractor, this one site they have the tree protection structure in place but there is activity to the left of this protective fencing which does cause compaction of the soil which pushes out the oxygen. This is the only, i would say, slight infraction i found on the site and, overall, all the tree protection theyve installed since mid october is actually in very Good Condition and has b n been, i would say respected by folks on site. If there is if there are folks parking in the set back area, the grasses, near any of these tree, we can definitely follow up with the contractor. For some of these photos you can see the very clean site, surprising to have that. So we do disagree with the assessment that were failing to protect the trees on the site. And that concludes the feed back from the site. Commissioner lazarus i have a question. You said since mid october, it was protected. How long was it unprotected . Thats a good question. The trees were posted for removal in from mid june to mid july. When we say unprotected, they didnt have physical measures in place around the trees. I mean, thats the answer i guess. I would say as far as we know, it would be the mid summer when we were on site. Commissioner wilson thats something someone thought was good back in the day . Yes. Unfortunately, some people still believe that. Public works minimum fine is 2,000 a tree to persuade Property Owners from doing that. We always recommend folks hire certified arborist to do that work. Not surprising Housing Authority sites have a lot of trees in Poor Condition. Lot of those have been mitigated. We went through ten years ago and Partnership Public works with housing to try to identify the worst of the worst. Not at every site across the city, but in many of the housing areas across the city. Commissioner wilson poor Structural Conditions that you talk about, does that have anything to do with the construction . In other words, if the construction wasnt there, would we be having this conversation . Great thank you for bringing that up. I was going to emphasize that in the apell annes brief, they talked about downgrading condition relating that to the tree protection. All of the problems that i see are related to the cultural historical care of the trees. And so all these topping cuts and poor structure, nothing to do. Its unrelated to construction on site. The on thing related to the ground level would be where we have existing sidewalk damage where thats going to need to be repaired and cause the root to be pruned. Khreupb one last question, are the trees salvageable . The trees are not. Department of public works recommends removal of these trees. Whether youre mounding the soil amove or excavating, if youre excavating theres no way. Even if youre adding soil above the trees themselves are really in Poor Condition. And not in a condition that we would make the owner retain on site. There really are significant structural problems with the trees. President honda as an arborist, we can predict when a tree will fail. Trees rarely snap in half in a healthy section of wood. It typically occurs where theres a strong likelihood of failure. Theres real structural weakness. All five of these trees have a lot of, lot of structural weaknesses that are significant. Is there an obligation to replace . Yes. So replacement is required. And the applicant can probably sphaoebg more to that. I am satisfied with the number of replacement trees and where theyre proposing them. There be larger, a larger species of maturity, a cedar. In india they call it a timber of the gods. Definitely can pack a great punch. Thats a great species along with several in the immediate area. So i am satisfied with the replacement plan. Thank you. President honda any more questions . No, please. Commissioner fung how would you characterize the root ball of these trees . The root ball so how much of the soil i mean, the roots are out there. Theyre spreading out all over the area. They can extend well beyond the overall high of the tree. They can extend that far beyond the base of the trunk in both directions. So the roots themselves are out there. Theyre in the sidewalk. Theyre in the set backs in the green grassy areas. But most of the trees roots are in the top two feet of soil. Structural roots and all the fine absorbing roots. Thats where theres a lot of impact to tree health. Just in that couple feet of soil. Not necessarily six to eight feet down. Its really top level. So by root ball, were just theres no way to transplant them. Theyre too large. The trees have multiple branch failures, poor structure. Topping trees is absolutely reducing the life span of trees when people do that. Youre reducing the life span easily by 50 . So its very difficult to, you know, make an Reclamation Project out of something that requires too much risk and mitigation. Commissioner fung i believe part of their containment process is to provide a containment material above the berm, and then those six inches of soil above it. Whats the impact of that containment material . Sure. Well, if the existing trees were there, what it does, it cuts off oxygen to the root system. Then it also makes it really hard for water to reach the fine absorbing root. Nothing would happen overnight. It would be over a period of a year or two. You see a slow decline and the canopy bigger. If they replaced the trees here with mitigating the soil, you can put the nutrient six inches of fresh soil, roots can go down and trees are amazing at mitigating metals and other hazards, so theres no impact to existing lead on tree roots as far as i know. But its a slow impact. If the trees were in better structural condition, you know, we might have a different approach with, welsh lets create tree wells and elevate the soil and keep the soil away from the trunk and have watering tubes and lets figure this out. We dont even we can even begin to Start Talking about that with the trees that we have in these conditions. We just dont have the Good Conditions to say, these are worth retaining on the site long term. Commissioner fung okay. Normally, youve been before us many, many times. You usually indicate how long the tree has been there, which you didnt this time. You said if you topped the tree and the trees were probably topped 30 years ago, it cuts their Life Expectancy to 50 . How long do these trees normally live . I think the most reasonable average Property Owner would have removed these trees a long time ago. Its the Housing Authority. I know theres a lot of moving pieces with housing that i can always keep track of. Its a fact that they have not been able to provide the necessary resources to maintain properties in what we would consider a flourishing state. So that answers the question a little bit. I think if most homeowners had one of these trees in their back yard, it would be removed a long time ago. Thats the benefit of having our significant tree ordinance. Lets take a close look and look at what we can retain and keep. If the tree is not in great condition, we just cant force that condition so close to public right of way. To answer the question, i dont know when the trees were planted. Theyre very old. Theyre also species that grows very quickly and theres green grass out there. If theres been irrigation going on year after year, im sure its been broken every now and then. That can make a tree grow pretty quickly. They could be 50 years old, give or take. President honda has there been any documented root failure for those six trees, or five trees . Welsh theres definitely signs of it. So the trees themselves show that theres been limb failures. When i was out there the other day, someone came up to me and said, oh goodness, i never know if people are gonna say please dont remove the tree or whether theyre gonna say, can you remove it yesterday . In this case it was someone who lived in the area and said, the trees are constantly dropping branchs. Thats how i expect that species to perform. Dropping limbs on a regular basis. From small to large, large limbs. President honda last question. Given that the disclosure on your notification was not complete, do you think that it was issued in error . You know, we always err on the side of more information. We always try to avoid any hand written notes. Go back to the office, type this out. We have 30day public notification with the issues about soil mitigation on there. We receive protests. Social media, next door, things like that. When i look at the file, theres clearly a robust Public Engagement and involvement. President honda do you think that if more disclosure would have been given, would there have been more public input . There could have been less protest because we would have said, look, these trees are bit of a nonstarter to begin with. President honda okay. And that certainly would help. President honda thank you, mr. Buck. We can take Public Comment on this. Is there anyone who wishes to speak . Please step forward. President honda good evening, welcome. My name is brian bates. I live on sutter and baker. Also say that Steve Williams is working pro bono. I, too, walk past the trees on a daily basis. Limbs are not dropping from those trees. I will state and the record shows, based on what steve has presented, the contractor has, from day one, shown reckless abandonment for the project. Today if you walk by there, its a complete mess. We only happen to have barriers around the trees because of steve coming here and mandating that. It did happen within maybe a month after that period. We still seckars parked down the street. Actually on the grass near the trees, affecting these trees. So its a disappointment. I think from day one theres not been the transparency that we would have normally expected. These are beautiful trees. You can go for blocks around our neighborhood and youre not going to see trees like this. Based on where they are putting the particular boundaries for the lead, i cant map to at least two or three of the six trees falling within those barriers. So where they are mounding the actual lead, i dont think corresponds directly to the six trees that were talking about. So if theres further evidence of that, maybe thats not the case. Many of these trees on broaddrick and baker do not map to where theyre planning to mound all that. Thank you. President honda thank you. Next speaker, please. Welcome. Hello. My name is david lemur. I live across the street from 2400, from that tree. It does lean a bit. I do recall a branch falling from that tree. But i think they should make efforts to retain those trees. Just hearing about the mounding of the soil today, it seems to me that theres a lot of space to the east on post and along broaddrick street where there are no trees that they could mound soil in those areas. The sidewalk, it isnt perfect, but its not significantly off kilter. I mean, i walk there every day just about. Anyway, very nice tree, both of the trees on post street. It seems to me they have years of life left in them, even though they might have some rot, as the gentle man was saying. They would last a long time longer i think if they were not killed. So i urge you to save the trees. Thank you. President honda thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Good evening and welcome, mr. Steen. Good evening commissioners. Matthew steen, San Francisco forest alliance. We testified at the dpw hearing at which a number of these records were not available until the contractors actually came up to speak and turn these records in to the hearing officer. So i didnt feel there was sufficient advance Public Notice or availability of these abatement letters. Or mitigation plans. But in general, i just wanted to repeat my testimony from the hearing in september. That these are significant trees that deserve the greatest protection under the public works code. And that a street Protection Plan was filed, some tree protection is on site now, although i dont know if the tree protection is around all of the perimeter trees planted by friends of urban forest and if those are impacted. I did want to emphasize there was simply a lack of Public Notice. I did a records request shortly after from public works shortly after the hearing officer upheld the hearing officers decision. And these plans were not available in that records request. What i wanted to do is ask that the board of appeals remand this case back to the department of public works so that we can have, there were discrepancies in the plans and abatement measures, as well as a placement lead soil removed and where theyre melding it so that the public can take a look at these plans anew. Look and see if there are any alternatives to saving these trees. I think we recognize that any trees that are hazardous certainly should be looked after an removed. But i have to note that while the trees were rated, somewhat vaguely in Poor Condition, none of them were remarkable in being hazardous or considered hazardous. There was no notice to that effect. I would also urge that if these trees ultimately, or some of these trees ultimately removed that they be replaced with 48 inch box trees as opposed to the really young saplings that are planned by friend of urban forest and that this cost be borne by the contractors. They have submitted a plan. They are planting 84 trees which is a little bit of overkill on tree replacement. That, i believe, urban forestry is discussing that with them currently. In fact, i think that would be too many trees. I would simply ask the board to remand this case. President honda thank you. Your time is up. Any other speakers . Seeing none, mr. Williams. Theres another speaker . Please step forward. President honda welcome. Hi. Thank you. Thank you for this evening. Im a neighbor. I have lived in my wonderful neighborhood for 25 years. Yeah, its true. These are Magnificent Trees and you just its pride of the neighborhood. Pride of our neighbors. And were very happy that there is going to be new building and theres some care finally for the westsigh court. But, tkpwaoez, those trees are just amazing. I confirm what steve said. I saw a car parked, or a truck parked right up on the tree, you know, at one time. I walk every day. There has been neglect on their part. Oh, lets just get rid of these things. Itsier. I just wish people would slow down and give our neighborhood beauty and peace and Magnificent Trees and keep them. Thank you. President honda thank you. State your name for the record, maam . Any other Public Comments . President honda welcome. Thank you. Charles calhoun 2459 post street. My wife and i have lived at that address for nine years. Its directly across from one of the trees on post street, i believe, the gentle man who referred to it as number one. In any case, its the western most of the two. Its absolutely beautiful. We stare out of it from our windows. I just want to say i wonder what neighbor it was who spoke about limbs falling because we see those trees every single day. I dont ever remember seeing limbs fall from the trees on post street. I cant speak to the ones on the others, but i just want to reinforce that this pair of eyes is telling you that limbs dont fall very often there. President honda thank you. Any other Public Comments . Okay. Seeing none, mr. Williams. Thank you. Steve williams again. Theres been no tree, no failure for the past 35 years that i have lived nearby there. Weve had some tremendous weather in that time. Why did the hearing officer get it completely wrong then . You know . Dpw is out there doing their job. The condition of the trees is not an issue. Im sorry. Theres been no due process. It was never posted. There was a place to post that. We had no chance to respond on that. I reviewed the individual inspection reports for each tree. They arent all listed as poor. They werent nearly as gloomy as what mr. Buck just painted for you. Two of them were actually called to be in Good Condition. Fair to Good Condition. Three of them were considered fair and Poor Condition. So, you know, that process that he described to make sure that the significant trees get their due, thats why were here, it wasnt done at all. Theres no tree Protection Plan that was ever filed. No tree survey was ever filed. This is a 40 million project on public property being conducted by a public agency. And they didnt follow any of the rules. The same rules, the same hoops that they make the little individual homeowner jump through for a tree survey if theyre going to replace one damn street tree they got to fill out survey and Protection Plans. Nothing for six significant trees on this huge project. The berms were never disclosed, never discussed at all at the prior hearing. Thats why the hearing officer got it completely wrong. And tell me, why did the berms have to be built directly under the trees . President honda overhead, please. Can i have the overhead. What miss grady flashed up there, it shows the berms being built directly under the trees. What about all this other space . Goodness gracious. Its a very large spot. Were talking about six trees. You could build the berms almost anywhere. It is almost a completely level lot. It slopes slightly from west to east. So the mitigation plan does not mention trees at all. Look at the first two attachments submitted by the project sponsor. Theres no mention at all of the trees. In fact, the mitigation plan, which we attached part of, it says that the soil will be hauled off. Exhibit 8 says it will be dug down 6 inches and hauled off. Thats how its going to are remediated. Theres no mention of the any of the trees in the mitigation plan. Nothing in writing. The landscapers may have put it in their plans. Most of that was created since the hearing in september. But theres no mitigation plan. Theres no writing that mentions any of the trees. Theres zero evidence that the trees were ever considered in any way, shape or form when the creation of the retention plan or the landscaping plan was made. Theres zero evidence in front of you that they were ever thought about and that they ever followed the rule, that they ever looked at the public works code. Its a systematic failure from dpw. President honda your time is up. You may ask mr. Buck about the internal list. Three minutes of rebuttal. Theres a lot to attack and i only have three minutes. Let me do two things. I just want to show you a plan. This is an aerial photo of the same site. But what i have outlined and the image is pretty poor. But basically, the red lines represent the locations where were placing berms. Those are concrete retaining walls. Those are 8 inch thick concrete walls that are being built at a level of two foot height. Those are happening in those three locations that he was just referring to and the three locations above and the two locations on baker street. Westside court is 80 buildings and parking. There is not a lot of room for us to place the soil. We place it in these locations because basically we dont have a whole lot of choices. To retain the soil on sight, weve got to find locations. The narrower portions of the site actually become fairly infeasible because youre building the narrow path, building an 8 inch high retaining wall. Youve got fairly limited amount of space to stock the soil. So thats one thing. The other thing is that the eventual plan, weve got 227 new trees. 227 new trees. Weve got central courtyard with raised community gardens. Weve got trees throughout the site. Weve got new trees in the locations where were removing the existing trees. Were mulching, planning to mulch the trees and to use that mulch across the site. These trees will not survive. They will deteriorate on their own, but will certainly deteriorate as a result of the soil. The other thing i want to say, there are two documents in steves brief. One in which is actually the tree removal permit itself, which shows that the soil remediation is the purpose, the reason why were requesting the removal of these trees. And then the other is actually a series of correspondence that he has which dpw and the landscape architect. In this document it says the very last part of this. It says thanks for touching base. This is from dpw. Is there a site plan . I found only room for one new additional tree on post. Found eight trees that we would approve for removal and replace because of Poor Condition. Two trees on sutter, one on broaddrick, three on post and two on baker. This is part of his actual brief. So none of this was a secret. It actually was discussed at the hearing on the 25th in which he was actually at the hearing with a copy of the soil mitigation plan which includes these plans that actually implement how were going to cover and retain these soils. President honda thank you. Commissioner lazarus is it five trees or six trees . Its five significant trees, but less than ten feet off the property line. The diameter of the tree is more than 12 inches. Theres a tree on broaddrick which is further inset into the property and so its not covered. I actually dont know that its significant. Its in the way of an ada path way. Commissioner lazarus you did ebbing explore other alternatives around there to avoid having to affect these trees . The issue is that we have so much soil. The soil is, if you looked at that exhibit, you see the extent of the berm that were talking about. Its quite a lot of soil. Actually, my notes i referenced the amount of tonnage, i have to flip through to find the reference. Its a lot of soil that we have to retain on the site. Commissioner lazarus which size trees are you proposing to replace these with . The planning plan across the site, its 15 inch box. What i was talking to chris about and he mentioned there are four trees that are proposed that are cedar trees which were intended to sort of be monument trees. Theres two on sutter street, two on post. Then there are two location on baker. What we talked about was potentially upsizing those four monument, four significant trees that were planning that are going to be making statements and having those start out a little more mature. Commissioner lazarus lot mature. Thank you. Commissioner wilson why arent the trees protected before urban was called . I addressed that in my brief. The permitted plans. Weve got permitted plans that include civil plans, demolition plan for site. The civil plans was the tree Protection Plan that the format for how youre supposed to protect them. Then at the point youre starting to do site work, which we were not in july. We werent planning to do that until november which raises another issue, which were being delayed as a result of this. As of november that would have been when we would have implemented it. Because this came up the contractor immediately, within a week of having gotten the notice went to work getting the trees protected. All of the street trees and all of the newly planted street trees it looks like there may be a couple mature ones that may need to be protected. They went to work, got that plan approved. I included some correspondence from dpw acknowledging that should have been done and that it was satisfactory. Commissioner wilson i got that. It wasnt entirely clear to me. President honda youre debating about upsizing four trees. Theyre currently at 15. What are you proposing to upsize those to . We could upsize them to 24 inch box. I did get a quote to upsize them to 36 inch box. Its around 600 bucks a tree for that. I would be willing to pay the 2400 for those four trees. President honda thank you. Any rebuttal . Good evening. Chris buck San Francisco public works, bureau of urban forestry. Just to clarify, thats a good point about no site work occurring earlier in the summer. To go back to the question, commissioner, about why was there no protection earlier . When we were out there posting, our inspectors are, theyre tree advocates. They see something wrong, theyre going to speak up. So my sense is, verified by the applicants, that there wasnt active work going on. Hey, youre actively working out here and youre not protecting the trees. Granted, if there are additional cars parking out there, thats something we like to follow up on. We get calls all the time for folks weve been working with for years across the city. Were constantly going out there to make sure that trees are protected. You know, i think public works staff, we could have put more information on that posting notice. It was not done to trick anyone. It just, you know, we have a younger inspector who did the work. To him the feature was the disturbance. Regarding me coming in now this evening and talking about the Poor Condition of the trees, i have been at this for awhile. Reasonable minds will differ. I have six inspectors. On any given day, we might come up with different opinions. I know based on how public works has handled similar cases across the city though, having been doing this now for a long time. These trees are not in a condition that we would say to an owner, yep, youre going to have to lets work around these trees. Theyre just not. In terms of due process, we have a 30day notice. We have the most robust tree removal process of any agency in the city. Obviously, we oversee street trees so we definitely should have a more robust process. But theres a 30day notice and we had a protest and we had a hearing. At that hearing we presented different information. So, you know, im gonna have to disagree with the apell annes assessment of over all conditions. I was there the other day. Things look good. All the street trees are protected. If theres one street tree that isnt protected, id be surprised. We can doublecheck that. You know, most of the street trees have protection on them and we have our own project. This site has none of that. I dont think they went out there just to put out fresh 2x4s. Just a little bit of rebuttal on the process. I want to partner with our appellant and Matthew Stein and work on additional sites in the future. Looking forward to that. Thank you. President honda question, mr. Buck . So, on the owe if the significant trees are allowed to be remove and we have four cedar month monument trees, do you think 24 inches is acceptable . Well, my feedback to the applicant during our recess, we were discussing replacement size trees. Something she noted was that this isnt a high rise development. This is low income housing. Its lead mitigation. Im kind of speaking on behalf of, we try to get a larger box size when president honda im asking from a developers point. The question i have, if this would have been a private developer, what would we have required . Sure. Its different if its a private developer is going to put in a two story basement garage and have a bunch of condos and charge and arm and leg. That projects going to be full of money. I would say, yeah, private developer, absolutely require as much as possible. Im not an expert on the facts of the owner and the finances on that at all. I keep my blinders on. We generally have said repeatedly when you transplant with a larger size box tree, it takes that tree a longer time to adjust to the site and grow. I have done it myself. You plant a smaller tree, it will catch up to the other tree quickly. In that sense, i dont feel like if we were denying the application saying, no, these trees are in Good Condition, we think they should remain. But the decision will be to overturn that, we would advocate for a larger replacement size. In this case, these arent trees that i feel someone is removing out of turn or for again, it not our job to assess it. Thats some of our feedback. Were open to what the board decides on that. President honda okay. Thank you. Commissioner lazarus just to clarify that. Youre satisfied with 15 inch being appropriate given the rate of which it will grow . Is that what youre saying . I think in the immediate area where the subject trees are located, all those replacement trees should be 24 inch box size trees. We will have to determine the exact count. On multiple, where the two locations are on both frontages and where the one tree is on sutter, theres definitely an opportunity to have several 24 inch box replacement trees that would become future significant trees as they get bigger in the future. Say in those immediate areas which are greened out, where theyre doing that soil mitigation, within the green areas, those replacement tries should be 24 inch box. Commissioner lazarus not 36, but 24 . Exactly. Based on, again, were not advocating here for retaining trees. So to us it seems reasonable. Its unfortunate, but it seems reasonable removal despite the loss to the community. President honda thank you. Thanks. Matter submitted. Commissioner fung i guess ill start. Understanding that the Housing Authority or whatever power that might have been that has maintained these trees and street trees for the last 30 to 40 years, their funniding issue have been removed. Thats why we have a new Housing Authority or whatever that may be called. Looking at mr. Bucks, or the departments description, you know, codependent branchs and limb failure especially in a housing buildings where there are children present, is dangerous. The amount of new trees that are there i think compensates for the loss of the canopy of these trees that are in Poor Condition. The only caveat or concern i have is that this board has consistent consistently, when significant trees have been removed has consistently asked for larger boxes to be installed. I think that there should not be a double standard because its a Housing Project that we allow a less box tree to be planted in that property. That, for me, i think it should be consistent. As mr. Buck had mentioned, whether its a development thats charging a lot of money for condos with under ground garages. When you remove a significant tree, i think it should be replaced with as much as we can. So i mean, im not going to suggest 48, but i would prefer 36 on the four cedars and maybe 24 on several of the other plants. Maybe mr. Buck can help with that guidance. But other than that, i would be inclined to deny the appeal and allow the permit to go forward. Commissioner wilson do you have any concerns about the process . Not withstanding what was in the brief. President honda i probably should have made this disclosure prior. I actually drive down this street. We had a case last week that was on broaddrick. I dont normally take baker or broaddrick. I normally come down post because my daughter attends school two blocks away. I do drive down that block. Because we are the tree guardians of the city, i did notice the notifications on the trees as i was driving down, i believe it was broaddrick that i drive down on. You know, i asked the department if he felt that the permit was issued in err or defective. I think there was enough information that allowed the public not to be harmed in the way of disclosure in protecting these trees. The only other concern to the developer is that there was a picture of a contractors truck on the sidewalk. That should be definitely dealt. Commissioner fung i dont have issue with the process. We are hearing this. Our mailing list is at least as stringent as a billing permit is so i have no issue with that. I do have an issue with taking it beyond the 24 inch box. Id rather see that were not only addressing the question of urban forestry, but the fact that were building housing. President honda when you say 24, are you just talking about the four cedars . I would leave it at the four at this point. Commissioner lazarus i support that. President honda im not sure if i do. Commissioner fung that would require a condition. President honda if we dont agree, it goes as it was. Make the motion. Commissioner fung ill move to deny the appeal on the basis that the excuse me. Let me restate that. I will move to grant the appeal and condition the permit on the basis that the four possible monument trees that they had mentioned president honda cedar. Commissioner fung become 24 inch box trees rather than what is currently established. And on the basis that these trees, the existing trees are in Poor Condition and need to be replaced. President honda youre not going to add that the Department Work with them regarding the tree trees. I want to make sure urban forestry understand what four trees are at issue. I dont want there to be any disagreement. President honda sorry. Were in deliberation. The motion is to issue the permit on the issue that the four monument tree bes 24 inch box size. Thats on the basis that the existing trees are in Poor Condition and need to be replaced. On that motion commissioner lazarus. Aye. President honda. President honda aye. Thank you. Commissioner wilson. Aye. That motion does pass with a vote of 40. And we will move on then to item number eight. Appeal number 17177. Stanley debella verse the department of building inspection. The property at 2616 24th avenue. Protesting the issuance on october 26, 2017 to zhou xin wei president honda sorry. Could you please exit the room silently. Site permit new two story horizontal rear addition. Two new bedroom, family room and two bathrooms at the first floor. President honda good evening and welcome. The plans said on them that this was going to be a structure that could not the addition could not be seen by the street from the street. This is a sideview of the house in question. You can see that you can see it. This is a view of the back of the house from the alley on the side. You can also see that the 24th avenue is quite visible so this addition will be seen from the street. There is a door on this wall that does not show up in any of the plans. So its not in the existing or proposed. This is the back yard where there are several trees. I have heard nothing about whats going to happen with their removal. It also shows the contractors have moved in a bunch of Building Materials after the permit has been expired. This is the contractors moving in through that nonexistent gate. That was january 4. Sorry. On the permit, it said that prior to issuance of the permit that the concrete needed to be fixed in front of the house. This is a picture of a concrete that was never fixed. And this shows the largest tree in the back yard which is well over 12 inches which is right next to that alley so it should be covered under the street tree