and we have chris buck, with san francisco public works and turn off all cellphones. appellants, permit holders and department respondents are given seven minutes and three minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated must include their comments within the periods. members of the public who are not affiliated with the parties, have up to three minutes each to address the board with no rebuttal and time may be limited to two minutes if there are a large number of speakers. our legal clerk will give you a verbal warning before your time suppose. four votes are needed. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing the board rules are hearing schedule e-mail board staff. regarding public access and participation. they are paramount importance to the board and they will replicate the in-person hearing process. we are broadcasting and streaming this hearing live and we will have the ability to receive public comments for each item on today's agenda. to watch on tv go to cable channel 78. it will be rebroadcast on fridays at 4:00 p.m. a link to the livestream is found at sfgov.org/boa. in public comment can be provided in two ways. you can join the zoom meeting by computer, please go to our website. and click on the zoom link or you can call in by phone. you call (833)548-0282 toll-free and enter the following webinar i.d. 819-53-174387. sftv is broadcasting and the streaming the access instructions across the bottom of the screen if you are watching the livestream or broadcast. note, to block your phone number when calling in first dial star 67 then the phone number. listen for your item to be called and dial star 9, equivalent of raising your hands so we know you want to speak. as i said, you'll have two or three miss debending on the doll of speakers and they will provide with a verbal warning before your time is up. please, know there's a delay between the live proceedings and what is brought and livestreaming and the internet. it's very important for the people calling into reduce or turn off the volume on their tvs or computers. if you have arranged for a spanish interpreter if a member of the public needs assistance, let us know. you can e-mail us, make a note in the room or raise your hand. >> sorry, never mind. >> clerk: thank you, welcome. spanish interpreter is here. we will swear in those who intend to testify. any member of the public may take oath pursuant to the sunshine (inaudible) and tonight's proceedings and wish to have the board give your testimony weight, raise your right hand and say i do after you've been sworn. do you swear or affirm the testify will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? if you are a participate and you are not speaking, put your zoom speaker on mute, turn off your cameras, note, we do have the chatbox available and if you need to request technical assistance, for access to the meeting or if you need a disability accommodation. the chatbox is not to be used for public comment or for conversing with other people and it's primarily we want to ensure that people have access to the meeting. so we will now move on to item number 1. this is general public comment. it's an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter within the board's jurisdiction but it's not on tonight's calender s there anyone else who would like to speak to the general public comment. i see two -- she should be on there. >> hello. >> hi, there. i won't be on video so i'll just have this picture up here of me. should i start? >> yes, please go ahead. >> ok. so hi, everyone, my name is tanya and i identify as a chicana living in the bay area. thank you for this opportunity to submit my comments and concerns to the board of appeals and i am here to express my deep concern and satness for the project, adding attempt to destroy over 50 trees -- >> ma'am! we're not on those items yet. this is for items that are not on the agenda. if you have public comment on items that are not on the agenda but within our jurisdiction, but you'll have an opportunity later. >> sorry about that. >> that's ok, no problem. >> we have one more person calling in. are you here for general public comment. this is for comment on items not under our agenda? >> yes, i'm sorry, i misunderstood. i would like to do general comments when you are done. >> we're on general public comment right now. do you want to talk about the 24th street tree removal or something else? >> 24thth street tree removal. >> you will have a chance later on. we have someone that would like to provide general public comment. welcome. >> hi, yes, i'd like to screen share. i requested that. this is for a general public comment and i hope that i will not be sensorred because what i'm going to share is not going to be liked by some people here. this is my website by the way, for people that want to get involved in protecting our urban forest. and this is the link to my website as well spas urban as un forestry places. i'd like to bring this to your attention which i will just play really quick. >> we can't hear anything. >> um, would you like me to pause time? >> that would be appreciated. let me try that one more time. >> time is cause paused at 2:20. we're not throwing darts at you. and i dealt with mr. buck prior to being on the board and i think he is a great guy. he loves his trees. i know chris and i see pictures on his facebook about the trees. chris and i are personal friends. [laughter] >> i'm very concerned that we have a vice president on this board of appeals whose personal friends with one of the defendants and i'm really concerned at how that will affect the bias of these proceedings. and i've reached out to the ethics commission and district 9 office and i know paul is here and i have not heard a reply as to what might be done about this egregious conflict of interest. you can see this on my website. thank you. >> thank you. if could stop sharing your screen that would be great. i believe we have another speaker. >> i don't see another one. >> roz -- >> she wanted to speak in the proceedings for the tree matters. >> ok. >> so, that's it -- >> i think that keyshia bowler wants to speak on general public comment. i don't know if you can promote her. >> let me see. are you there? >> ms. bowler, are you there? >> yes, can you hear me? >> would you like to speak in public comment? >> yes, i would. >> you have three minutes, ma'am. >> all i want to say is what i've said before, which is that i think that remote public hearings aren't public. remote hearings lack the attendance of people who woke like to attend that can't do it technologically. there are various reasons for all kinds of lack of technology, either don't have access to a computer and especially now with the public buildings closed where people do go to use the computers and then if they do have the computers, they might -- the computer might not be equipped to access the site and also by not being present at the meeting, people who want to comment aren't able to be in each other's presence if they chose to speak with one another. and know i'm speaking against the tide but what i'm saying i believe to be true and significant. i don't think the decisions should be made out of the adequate presence of the public. thank you for your attention. >> thank you, mrs. bowler. is there any other general public comments? if you called in, please press star 9 to raise your hand. if you are here for general public comment. ok. we'll move on to item number 2. commissioner comments and questions. >> questions? >> if there are any changes or additions or deluxes. deletion. >> we have a motion from commissioner swig to adopt those minutes and on that motion -- i'm sorry. [ roll call vote ] >> clerk: that motion carries 5-0 and the minutes adopted. we're moving on to items 4a to 4d. >> can we comment on the minutes? >> oh, i'm sorry. is there any public comment? >> yes, i'd like to make one. >> please, go ahead. >> thank you. >> i want to just thank the office for making them accurate. that was more accurate however there's one glaring missing thing from the minutes, which is the mention i made about director mohammad nuru and that's a important part of my public comment. i devoted a lot of time to my public comment on that issue and i would really like it if that was reflected in the minutes. thank you. >> thank you. >> ok. is there any other public comment? we will move on to appeal numbers 19-097, 99, 100, and 101. latino cultural district and kendra versus san francisco public works, urban forestry and subject property location is 24th street between mission street and appealing the issuance on august 26th, 2019 to san francisco public works and between mission street and with replacement unless otherwise noted by public works. replacement trees size will be 12-inch and 36-inch box size trees depending on required space from utilities. replacement species shalling both red maple and the replacement trees and sidewalk repairs will be completed in three months after the removal of the trees and additionally there's room to plant 17 new trees at new planting sites. addresses range from 2,700 to the 32 blocks of 24th street and this is order number 201771. and we are going to be hearing from mr. zack carnazius first. >> thank you, you have seven minutes. i'd like to say this meeting is largely a sham. and i'm here to support the public and their outcry for how upset we are about this order to gentrify the 24th street mission neighbourhood and the people ask me why are these trees coming down. it's a great question. it has to do with money, liability, and mostly it has to do with removing a barrier to create more construction projects to wipe off the face of this neighbourhood people of colour and people that have lived in this neighbourhood for decades. that is what is being routinely done around this city through illegal tree removing and i believe this meeting is a sham. the vice president is personal friends with the defendant who is representing public works and they're going to sit here and they're going to tell you all they're listening to your concerns and darts are being thrown and ar oars being thrown and they're vulnerable. it's not true. we're expressing our concern and our anger at the disrespect and the lack of care for the public trust. which is our public trees. most of the other appellants will talk about measures they've been making with the department and my heart goes out to them and i know they're working hard and doing hard work and i found them to be negotiation meetings fruitless and this departmentalize to the public and abuse their role as public officials and i'm going to show you some examples of that. first of all, in the minute notes from july 1st, we had four or five people spoke up about illegal tree removing by public works in the hayes street and hayes valley area, that was mentioned at the last meeting at board of appeals. they also illegally removed trees at quinte street, which was part of my appeal and this board of appeals granted those appeals anyway. not the one for hayes valley but they have for illegal removals. when the trees are cut down during this process, this board still passes it and says yeah, you get a pass. they can illegally keep cutting trees and even have to bather with the appeals process it's just a rubber camp so let me explain why i don't think that conciliatory measures are the way to go. as i mentioned previously, the person that gave the order for these tree removals, was arrested by the f.b.i. on charges of fraud and corruption and the complaint alleges corruption pouring into san francisco from around the world and alleges corruption and kickbacks and side deals but one of san francisco's highest ranking public employees. why is nuru doing corruption? if we go to the website p. he makes $323,000 a year, i don't see why he needs more kickbacks and in department cries broke because they can't take cake of our trees. well, let's see how much chris buck makes. chris buck makes $168,000 a year and kevin jensen, who has been ignoring my e-mail requests going back to march, even after this board asked on july 1st if he responded to me, he makes $218,000 a year and well, when you put that all together and you look at what the watering cost s. i mean you are talking about a person's salary to cover the proper maintenance of these trees. department of public works will argue ann arborist recommended removal of these trees, that's true. but you will find that management of the disease it has, which is very common for these trees, is largely focused on prevention, there's underlying stress factors and they are stressed because they're not being taken care of. i did a request pared to get through for the watering of trees along this street and there's only 10 trees that are being watered. this is the a list of them there. none of them are the ficus. d.p.w. does not water any public trees after three years. they won't give it a drop of water. when these trees came out of the care of public works they looked like this. green, healthy, property owners had been taken care of them. when they came under the control of public works in 2017 through the proposition e, they started to decline clearly from not being watered and not being pruned and not being properly cared for and as this appeal is worn on over the months, the public of public works says the trees are in bad health and we have to take them down. in reports by christopher campbell, he says many of these trees are suffering from lack of maintenance and he goes into how the pruning has been done incorrectly. how can we approve permits and destruction of trees when this department isn't even trying if you go back to january, of 2019, and this is what he said that telling. >> it's a drag. the reason for my voice being horse. to hear from zack four years later, like appleton and mission we have four trees planted. >> four years is a long time to wait for trees to be replanted. even if we'll replace with a one to one ratio they lie, they don't do it. years and years they go by and a new tree, a new maple tree is not a replacement for a 50-year-old ficus tree. a huge part of my complaint is the inaccessibility for people with disabilities and seniors to read these notices that were put on these trees. i didn't find out about the original public hearing because the notice period had already lapsed in the time that i was able to get outside in my wheelchair. here is a video i would like to share showing that. >> 24th street here, having a lovely sunday, summer day here. it gets ruined by something like this 20 seconds, this is a city items in very small print which i can't even get closer to reach with my wheelchair and that is saying that they're going to cut down this tree. and they did haven't access to the appeal that took place. since i filed this appeal, department of public work -- >> that's time. >> all right. >> >> thank you. we will hear from joshua clip. klipp. you have seven minutes. >> i'm going to share my screen and play a video that is far less than seven minutes. >> thank you. >> >> i'll wait until you are set up for it. >> thank you, alek. >> you don't see that? >> yes. >> ok. here we go. >> my name is josh klipp, i'm an attorney, a tree advocate and someone who cares about the future of our city and our world. last year in covid terms the city declared that we are in a climate emergency. in response to that the san francisco department of the environment revised the climate action plan which noted that unless we sequester goals climate change will be inevitable and importantly, trees sequester carbon more efficient lemoore than anything else in the world. trees clean pollution from our air, provide shade, support ecology and improve community health and local economy. studies show that for every $1 invested in trees a city sees a 3-$5 return on that investment. despite all of this and a city plan to plant more than 50,000 new trees by 2034, in 2019, san francisco lost more than 2,500 trees and after that massive loss, the city proposed to remove 78 more trees from 24th street. and here is the thing, this isn't just another big number of trees proposed to come down. in 2015 when it was established as a cultural corridor, the commission on the environment supported that effort and specifically, the commission noted that the mission is disproportionately impacted by air pollution and the resulting health effects such as asthma. for those following the national news, we know that air pollution exacerbates the impacts of the global pandemic. for those of us following the local news they have suffered far, far more grievously than any other community by a lot. myself and hundreds of neighbours oppose this proposed removal. since the time this appeal was filed we've had no less than a dozen meetings, fundraised for the first time this san francisco's history convinced the city to conduct an assessment of what the loss of these trees would mean from an environmental perspective. one wednesday afternoon, a few of us joined up with a couple city tree inspectors and we measured those trees. the city came up with numbers on how much carbon these trees and how much air pollution they reduced. i asked the city for replanting plan and based on that information, and engineer and former director of energy utilities services for the university of california, created a comparative analysis of the environmental benefits of the city's proposed replacement trees. before i show you this data i want to state again that our predicted numbers are based on the city's provided replanting plan. based on the information, this year, the existing trees will sequester 4,287 pounds of co2 and divert 9,634 cal gallons of storm wear away from our sewer system and scrub 51 pounds of pollution from the air. in contrast, if all replacement trees went in this year and assuming not a single one dies, the replacement trees wouldn't sequester and divert 1,337 gallons of stormwater and scrub two pounds of pollution from the air. by the year 2034, the existing trees would see guess ter 4,287 pounds of co2 and divert 9,634 pounds of stormwater and scrub pollution from the air. in contrast, again, assuming all replacement trees survive, they would sequester 3,068 pounds of co2 and divert 7,095 gallons of stormwater and scrub 14 pounds of pollution from the air and these numbers are distressing. this is exactly the opposite of what our city and our world and specifically this community needs right now. so scheer what we did. we figured out that every time the city plants a tree, the cost includes the tree planting itself and three years of watering to make sure it is established. so we said tell you what, we know you are being asked to slash your budgets. but we also know that our neighbourhood deserves clean air, green space, shade from the hot sun, and the sound of birds and the morning. so if you plant the trees we will water them. if we water the trees you've got money leftover to plant three to four times as many as you originally planned. we also asked the city to work with the arbourist we hired to reach consensus on trees that can stay which they did. we asked the city to, rather than remove trees, increase their maintenance cycle and they agreed. we also asked the city to allow residents an opportunity to mourn these trees that to many are like family. we know we can't save every single tree ex the city can and must do better and what they have managed to achieve in this process is remarkable. it's a marvel for how communities can rally for one another and the place we call home. in closing, i ask this board to make a motion that is based on the commitments to public works and this community to public works. i ask it be spelled out so there's no confusion as to what will happen, how it will be happen. the neighbourhood has defended these trees for decades and over and over they have come together and time and again they have felt unheard. please, ensure that your decision hears this community and please ensure your decision honours the work of all the people who have shown through their dedication and countless hours of work how much this neighbourhood and these trees mean to them and to our world. thank you. >> thank you, we have a question from vice president honda. >> thank you, mr. klipp for your very well done -- the question i have, so if the city doesn't water, what is your infrastructure for watering these trees? >> that will be addressed by an appellant later in this hearing. >> i'll save my question for later. thank you. >> thank you. we also have a question from commissioner tanner. >> thank you, mr. klipp, i just wanted to know if you can go over the terms of the agreement that you came to with public works? what were the agreements? >> well, i would first say it's not an agreement in the sense that not all appellants have come to any sort of agreement but it was more of a discussion and here are things that could be done basically, i would call them more commitments. >> when you think about those commitments that you noted at the end of your presentation that you would like to see incorporated into the permit, could you outline for yourself then what you see those commitments being? >> yeah, again, i'm going to defer those are going to be covered by a couple of the other appellants and public works. >> i'll have questions after qul come back. thank you. >> ok, thank you. so, we will now hear from kia24, is mr. bokenegra here to speak on behalf. >> he is on the phone. >> can you hear me. he is on the phone. can you raise your hand fur on the phone. press star nine and we'll know that -- we see someone named lesley freeman. i see. ok. >> did it go through? >> yes. >> yes, hi, good evening. >> we can hear you fine. you have seven minutes, please. >> ok, thank you. good evening, commissioners. my name is carlos and i come before you on behalf of the latino cultural council to request this board to instruct the public of works to cease its removal of the trees and require upw to partner with ronen's office and the latino cultural for a transparent, responsible, and diligent investigation into these trees qualifications as landmark trees. in 19750, lower 24th street had trees the planning department recognized in its study made important contributions and added much needed greenly to the streets. these trees have been giving back to the latino cultural district in this community for 40 years. since that time, these trees are important cultural landmarks and widely recognized as a trees which line the road in barcelona spain and represent the cultural opportunity of the latino cultural district and its community. the roots are deeply connected to this latin x community to this very day. in 2014, they reached out to 4,000 in the people for its neighbourhood report on community planning process that it did in conjunction with the planning department. included, this report was included in the a brief. and among the cultural assets identified by this participant specifically were in their own words our historic trees. the ficus trees are tied to the spirit of the latino cultural district. the very prom inance of these trees and the lower 24th street corridor induces residents and visitors to divert their travel to 24th street when walk or traveling. these trees are becoming increasingly precious cultural sets as public works has not allowed the planting of another ficus street tree since the late 1990s. in fact, in 2014 these a target and public work issued order number 18415 and were eased for the removal standard for ficus trees. the department works and department in which journalist's words and centralling f.b.i. fraud scandal has clearly taxpayer dollars for years. this may affected your attention to and department wanted to remove skies and and in competence should not be enabled by passing the burden of failure on a community fight are fog its right to cultural avenue mission and community innocent of any wrongdoing. this board should instead hold dpw and responsibilities to be partners of the community and to prioritize the trees they neglected for years and i'm sure the communities will enable to help them with this effort. the urban forest report in 2019 stated that using the reported data on streets replanting and removal by the san francisco public works and friends of the urban forest for this report the current total number of street trees of june 30th is estimated at 124,796. compared to 2017. between 2017 and 2018, there is only one new tree added over all by dpw and in this report it was specific low stated that maintaining spaces does not meet the goals by 2024 tree planting activities will need to increase and end quote, adding one tree a year will not get us to the goal of 50,000 trees by 2034. in fact, in the fiscal year 2018-2019 they did the opposite. over 5,000 trees were removed and just under 2500 trees planted. the department literally doubled its tree removal compared to plantings. in the same report, they established that in the community the ability to provide adequate care to establish trees over 67% of the people that were surveyed were either somewhat concerned or greatly concerned about their ability to provide adequate care for established trees. and in terms of the ability to provide adequate care for newly planted trees over 56% of participants were somewhat concerned or greatly concerned about the dpw's ability to do this. this board should have the urban forestry department look at where maintenance fees are being spent and reallocate resources from hire resource income neighbourhoods to the cultural district. i hope this board will see the valid concerns of this community and the need to hold this department accountability to a higher standard of race and equity. the need to have them be partners with the community of colour and to help them preserve these culture assets if possible. and april 2019 was in part because of the local complaint that trees created tripping hazards caused by roots breaking through the sidewalks. and they are utilizing rubber iced cement to allow safe public right away by being flexible for root growth where other similar alternatives. in summary, the calle24 latino cultural allowed for these trees to be removed in order to and prioritize the maintenance and care of trees and if we believe in the principle equity and black and indigenous communities do matter. the removal of the trees represents a significant and material impairment that would forever alter the physical characteristics of latino culture district and damage a historical resource. any action to remove a tree carries with it consequences and the tree will never be replanted and it's impossible to separate the culture significance of these trees as they are such a integral at part representing the latin x community and the latino cultural district and this board and and the district council and community to engage in a community based planning to look into this determination as to whether these trees and the very important history and the development of 24th street. > >> i would like to share my screen, please. >> i'm ready to start the time. >> >> are you ready now? >> yes, is it coming up on your screen? >> yes, we see it, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. i'm grateful for the opportunity to speak tonight and i'd like to focus my comments in three parts. background, process, and where we are now. first a bit of background. i became involved as anna pel ant in this case last summer after i attended the june 5th public hearing regarding the mastery removals on 24th street. my neighbours and i were heartbroken on the process fact 6 and i did everything possible to save trees and our first hearing took place january 8th. there were concerns and the environmental impact and the remove number of ficus trees represented in a 2016 tree census and the lack of more creative solutions to preserve these trees. we needed more time to address these concerns and we are very grateful to have been granted the necessary continuances to do so. now a little bit about the process. directly following the january 8th hearing, the appellants, community members, chris buck and paul monday a met in anna joining room. the meeting served for anyone present to voice their concerns regarding the removals. as well as an opportunity to heart storm possible solutions, a contact list was initiated and those in attendsance were invite today subsequent meetings, there's a consensus to obtain an independent arbourist report. we understood that there was a possibility that we won be happy with the results of that report. but agreed to abide by the recommendations that would be given. between january 14th and march l of seven all-public meetings held at calle24 cultural. and nine meetings were held. efforts were made to include as many people as possible in these meetings, between january and june of 2020 our collect the efforts were able to conduct and complete an environmental impact study which josh klipp outlined in his presentation. we were able to assemble a small army of volunteers who participated in neighbourhood notifications and outreach and we had a gofundme to hire independent christopher campbell of bay area arbourist co-operative who conducted an in-depth study and report of these trees and he is here with us tonight should the board wish to district any questions his way. the final sign of christopher's report called for the removal of 37 ficus trees. this was painful information for our group to process yet essential information to determine forward steps. we took christopher's report to buff and together painstakingly addressed any discrepancies between the findings of the two organizations. we also began focusing our attention on the number of newly trees planted as a result of this removal. appellant job klipp noted if the community could establish -- if the community could lead establishment watering efforts than the city would have the money to plant three times the trees. this is clear when looking at the numbers below. the planting budget for the 24t0 but $75,000 of this is three years of establishment watering. were the community to receive watering responsibility that 50 trees would increase to 150 trees planted. or, the number of tiny trees you see on this slide. buff was enthusiastic about a community-led watering effort and requested a watering plan, which we created and provided to them in partnership with calle ven tee committee. i would like the reminder of my time to give you a most basic, condenses outline of the plan called mission verde. the watering mappen campuses has 24 blocks west to east and from 23rd to 25th streets north to south. they are divided no rainbow coloured quad rants, a, b and c and d each with its own captain. mission verde volunteers will be assigned water responsibilities based on the colour and quadrant and you can see is that available hydrants are on this map. mission verde volunteers will a retrieve their assigned watering cart, use a wrench, fill the watering cart and distribute 15 to 20 gallons of water weekly. each colour great krantz captain will be responsible for the watering schedule with the volunteers on their team and buff will be responsible foray rising the captains of the new plantings when they occur. captains will also be responsible for reporting the watering progress to buff, via a shared watering schedule document like the one that you see on the right, for example. i would like to conclude my time here tonight by saying that this plan is the product of hundreds of hours of work by people on every side of this issue. it may not be a perfect plan, i believe it is the best solution available for the implementation at this moment. and although i may not be able to save the nearest and dearest tree to my heart, the one i see everyday outside of my window, i do take comfort in the fact that we have fought hard to drastically decrease the over all number of tree removals and have fought hard to drastically increase the number of new trees planted. i also take comfort that through this initiative i'll positively participate in the healing of our neighbourhoods. it's in the spirit of service that we are looking for even more volunteers who would wish to join our efforts in assisting mission verde to work for the long-term wellness of our community. if you are interested, reach out to us. either to calle24 watt tree or me at the information in front of you. and the information can be found under website and we welcome -- >> time. >> we have a question from commissioner tanner. >> thank you. >> thank you for that presentation. i was wondering it's hard to hear the 37 trees but it's a lot of trees and just very impressed by the watering plan and the volunteers who you recruited and names which was great to see how organized the watering effort would be. is there anything additional, it's the question i asked, is n what you would be request that the 37 trees be the ones that are removed and i don't know if you came to agreement with buff on those or what was determined. >> i believe buff will speak about the trees and we arrived at a situation where some were in agreement with our independent arbourist and some were not in agreement so they took it tree by tree and i am not an expert on that but i know that they will address the of removals which is 33. >> >> in terms of requests that you would make of this body, i just want to make sure i have those clear if there are any specific address requests that you are making. >> i wouldn't say any specific requests. we're trying both urban forestry and those of us working to create something to be as specific as possible in this process and it ties into what the board would person that would be really helpful. >> the permit itself with a independent number of trees and mr. buff will speak to you later on and how many trees and of course they have the records of which specific trees are being removed and often we may include the number of replacement trees. i think is speaks to your watering plan and the potential perhaps to expand the number and size of trees based on the additional funds that might be available. we'll hear from urban forestry on that but i think it was 75 initial trees? what was the number? >> a total of 145. >> 145 total. >> we have discussed is that it would be 150 trees but in order to create six sets of watering apparatus for our plan, that money would be provided by bus so it horse the number of replacement trees. >> >> the number of trees total. >> if he is on the line still, i wanted to understand if there was anything that he was trying to request because i tried to have this question work with him more and is there additional terms or is it working together to implement the watering plan or is there something else that their speaking from public works and the city? >> thank you, commissioner. there is specifically a section within public works that is section a10a and it really locks over our process of designating certain trees as landlord trees. they're given additional protection and rights in terms of care and making sure that if a tree does have to be removed it's being removed because it's hazardous. i know at the last appeal we had mentioned looking into this and making this assessment but with the current covid-19 2019 outbreak and what the supervisors' office has been up to, trying to handle that crisis that opportunity really hasn't been done and so it would be asking for this board to provide "directive to d.p.w. to prioritize the partnership with the supervisors' office and the latino cultural district council. to really look into it and make this assessment of whether these trees qualify for landmark trees and that way we make sure that whatever action is taken for these trees is going to be done in assuring we're respecting the cultural nature of these trees and what they mean to this community. >> in terms of the lapped mark tree process is that something you are seeking to have occur in concert with this replacement and watering plan that was just presented or is it an additional thing, is it afterwards or alongside or for the remaining trees that are remaining after the 30 that have been removed. help me understand how you see this fit north. >> thank you for the question. >> we, we see this coming in beforehand. and really doing this for all the trees that are there currently. those trees have been there since 1975. i think in just doing our due diligence making sure we're taking add quilt assessment of these trees in the cultural significance this report be conducted first, that way they can carry ford and i think there's a legislation that would go before the board of supervisors to the department of urban forestry to approve that landmark status and making that assessment after words we can make sure we're only removing those trees that are absolutely necessary. >> so, not to make it too base, your desire is there may be some trees that are landmarks and there's a decrease in them? above the 30 that have been identified or is it more thinking we want to make sure in the future for those that remain their landmark? what is your hope to the landmarking process or your hope? >> i don't have exactly they're only to be removed if they have the qualification for hazardous trees by the public works and i don't have that with me but in doing so, it appears we're taking respect and adhere to go our accountability for each other and maintaining equity and making sure we're providing these trees they deserve it and the greatest protection that we can afford them and making sure that we're measuring twice and cutting once and determining they need to be removed for people's safety or they should stay for the significance that they play in the history and culture of the calle24 cultural district. >> thank you, very much. i'm sure when we get to that part they can talk about the hazardous tree definition that you are looking for. so no worries about that. >> i'm sure chris knows it by heart so thank you very much. >> thank you so much. if you have a question, district it to our legal process clerk on the chat function because they're using the question and answer function. you can just make a chat directly to alec. now we're moving onto the department of urban forestry and we have mr. chris buck you have 28 minutes since you are responding to four appeals. >> thank you. good evening commissioners. i'm going to share my screen in a moment. good evening, chris buck with public works urban forestry and let's get to screen sharing here. thank you. when i look back at our presentation that we had ready for the january hearing and i look at our brief that is quite detailed and it females like a museum and how much grounds we've covered so the last time we met that were regarding this topic you saw me heading out to the ex i will reroom and organized by supervisor ronen's office so he covered ground since then and it's a brief recap and try to figure into the details of few of the appellant. we do value these trees. we public works recognizes how last night and that was the reason why long ago, we set up to have additional meetings with the community to talk about the fact that we're in a process of evaluating those trees so when we make a decision or recommendation remove a dream, we take it seriously and that are not necessary to remove and in essence, removal is always the last resort. we're here because public works is responsible for maintaining all of the street trees in san francisco due to the passage of proposition e which we refer to as street tree sf and we're going to the city in a grid or key map section and and it's in the brief we provided at the end of last year. so again, street tree sf, we're going through block by block to address tree health and obviously recommending pruning when that's the right thing to do when the tree would remain relatively healthy. the issues we've been outlining with ficus is that in their very early years they were not intended to structural pruning in mind. it's not just a public works issue. this was an industry wide issue and everyone learned from that. last year there's much more structural concerning and we had a number of meetings with the community prior to hosting our own departmental hearing. our departmental hearing was held back on june 5th of 2019 and before you i have several of the meetings that were held and some of them were publicized in a chronicle and covered the walk through that we did on april 22th. and we had our public works hearing on june 5th. at that point in time, we recommended 77 trees be removed. the resulting decision, after the june 5th, hearing, recommended that 48 trees -- originally when he came to the community at those meetings we were saying that we found 77 trees that we thought were candidates for removal. is we posted those trees and the resulting decision was to recommend removal 48 of those trees. some of the outreach is outlined here as part of those efforts. bringing you up to speed with the developments that have been outlined quite a bit by a few of the appellants that we heard from just in the last few minutes. this was a one page are and two pages that i will guide you through. this is the basis of what we hope could be the basis for discussions and a way forward. flick works dipublic works met e appellants. after the departmental hearing we've agreed to multiple rehearing requests at the request of the community and trying to be sensitive to both off i impacts and we also requested to continue again so they can higher an independent arbourist to conduct what they felt would be a more impartial assessment of the trees which we granted that continuance. and so one of the things we'll talk about and i have details spread sheets here. what those recommendations are and how we want to move forward. so, in a very recent series, a number of series of meetings with the appellants by supervisor ronen's office they were made by the community. we've agreed to a number of considerations that have been asked of public works. one of the categories is cultural considerations and i won't read through this word for word but growing to the removal of 33 trees now which is a cultural ceremony and respect for murals and the replanting process that involves consultation with call e e 24 wt tree so we would be reviewing these planting sites with the community. the completion of the tree pruning and removal work on each block prior moving onto the next followed by the sidewalk work, i have additional information about that. the goal is to complete the work block by block within three months of the initial removal on that block. also supporting the creation of a community art by making wood from removed trees available for use or art creation and we've committed a working with the community to allow for neighbourhoods specific art to be installed on new tree cross braces are painting the tree sticks. and we're open to other suggestions from the community as well. regarding the environmental considerations, all the appellants, we understand, we hear you loud and clearly, removing a mature tree and replacing it with a young tree is not quote-unquote replacing that tree. the replanting plan with the urban forest plan helped identify that we have potentially 4,000 either empty or potential new tree basins to plant in district nine. along 24th street the current replacement plan is greater than one for one and we're essentially asking the board to approve the removal of 33 trees along 24th street with replacement with 50. of the 33 trees for removal, five can't be replanted due to utilities and we've identified 17 additional planting sites along 24th street, essentially everything from 24th street from potrero to mission and we'll talk about mission verde in a few minutes. recognizing that watering trees weekly for throw years by watering truck represents a lion's share almost two-thirds of the cost of planting a tree in san francisco by public works. the community is proposed taking on the watering responsibility for replacement trees. in exchange we would use the savings and costs to plant additional trees in the neighbourhoods. we're enthusiastic about this idea and having the community take on the watering responsibility. we would be there step-by-step. we of course need a hard, firm commitment. but this was the model before street tree sf and before prop e passed. it's not unprecedented and we would leverage, we would have a lot of skin in the game to make sure this succeeds. they've put together a strong watering plan as you have seen. we'll talk more about that. regarding maintenance, one of the things that we did need to be more creative and we will admit that and meeting with the appellants, we didn't believe we could commit to maintenance schedule lectures through the years which is what we believe pruning and allowing some industries would require and however, the cost savings of not removing those trees would allow us to then visit some of these subject ficus trees along 24th street on a two to throw year maintenance plan and when we achieved that settlement we realised that can he would to retrench pruneing and retain more of the trees. regarding communitien gainment, considerations, recognizing a neighbourhood group to monitor and assist with the implementation of the replanting and maintenance plan and we're enthusiastic to work with the mission verde group to successfully increase the number of replacement trees and ensure establishment of those trees. we do think this can be a model or partnership for other neighbourhoods to maximize the use of limited resources to plant more trees. the critical parts of our brief back in january was how much the funding picture has completely changed since january and january we were stating that the mayor had provided record amount of funding for tremendous planting and that is -- the budget say big problem for us. we've also stated a commitment to continue working to address accessibility concerns. it was pointed out that having website that shows all trees proposed for removal on our website, it would address accessibility that was an issue that other tree advocates wanted to know what are we up toe and we have a disclaimer and we remove those noticed from the website. these are 30 trees, pardon me. these are 30 trees that, at this point in time, we are in agreement with a few appellants. there are 30 trees that should be removed. this is the list of those 30 trees. after a number of meetings, we also met with their arbourist, christopher campbell and reviewed trees to see what else they can do. there were cases where we recommended retention and he recommended removal. and they went through this process and ultimately there's three tree these that we still feel in poor enough condition that should be removed and we think they can be pruned and monitored. additionally, 11 trees. we believe we can retain through pruning through this two to three year pruning cycle. i do want to point out that we did experience a large stem failure on june 17th of this year and adjacent to 26 and 24t. there was damage to the car and so, i do want to reiterate that we are seeking to remove trees because it's necessary, not for any other reason. regarding the replacement tree plan and mission verde. so again, five trees we need to remove cannot be ro replanted. all available planting locations on 24th would be planted and seven missing or empty basins on 24th street have already been planted. and 17 additional sites remain to be planted. they're new sites barring underground utilities. where the conversation really led with the community was what else can we do to mitigate the loss of so much canopy. that's where the appellant, came up with mission verde with additional feedback from the community. so in february 2020, we already planted some additional side streets and three quarters of the cost is aren't weekly watering for three years. the cost to purchase and plan is much smaller. and so, in these, if you want to call them creative discussions, at the request of the community, when they said well what if we take on watering, that is where the conversation started to turn positive. we believe we can plan up to 145 trees within those zones, be on those zones, and we can talk a little bit more about some of the logistics arounds that. regarding work phases, we said in black in fran -- we can't phase the work sort of beyond that. so we're not looking at a multi-year phase, we're looking at moving down block by block and making sure all the work is done and we are commit to go replant being removed trees on a block within three months of initiating removal. this is back in our presentation and in january and in terms of how we would structure this. the removal phase and we need to prepare the sidewalk and then of course the planting phase. at a minimum public works is committing to planting of course, for the 33 trees removed along 24th, replacing with and again, we are engaging with the community to plan up to just additional information. we have committed in our own hearings and preparation for the january hearings, on the three month turn around time, also that we provide bi-weekly project updates to supervisor ronen's office. now that we're partnering with mission verde and that can be cider and it will work on a weekly basis together. for questions and concerns and updates while the project is on going and we'll provide updates to calle 24 and be posting those on our website. so, if i could just -- let me stop the share. so to recap, we are really only seeking to remove the trees that are absolutely necessary to remove to address public safety. we are not trying to do anymore beyond that. we are charged with maintaining and enhancing expanding the urban forest. we believe engaging with the community's proposal to take on watering. they've actually done amazing job. i almost had goose bumps when we started reviewing whether they came up with a mission verde plan and that's when i started believing this can happen and we need a real commitment from watering. we also can provide a lot of resources. we can help with the watering workshops and we'll help with this early establishment because we can plant, i mean, we are reluctant with some of these conditions this are moving pieces that even ourselves cannot control and that's really it. it's taken a lot of work to get here. we want to thank the appellants and we understand not every appellant is on the same page with this proposal. appellants, we're involved. we appreciate that. even when the feedback can be difficult to hear. but we need to continue listening and we feel like we have a path forward with what tentatively two of the four appellants are, you know, suggesting that they would be willing to accept as conditions for removal. with that i would open it up to questions if we have any time remaining. >> we do have a question. >> we have a question. >> mr. buck, there were some references to a study about landmarking trees. i don't think you addressed that in our comments and i have two questions related to that. is that something that could have been done in these intervening six months and secondly, if it were to be done and it sounds like that could be a precursor to any of this happening, what would that involve? >> sure. chris buck, public works, so our assessment about the concept of landmarking, the trees, is that the trees are not in the good enough condition to landmark. the landmark tree programme is a programme that i've been working with for 20 years and it used to be limited and i was on the lapped mark treaty committee representing public works for a number of years and landmark trees in public works opinions should be trees that can pass us and remain on a site for a long time to come so that is our direct response to the concept of landmarking trees. landmarking trees is political. understandably. so, to landmark a tree, head of a department or members of the board of supervisors are those that can landmark a tree unless the tree is on private property. property owners can landmark a tree in their backyard but landmark trees require a department head or a member of the supervisors to put fourth that landmark application and this appeal was received back in january. i have not heard any additional discussions around landmarking. the public works' opinion is these trees need to be removed because they're in poor condition and it's not making a landmark tree. we recognize the cultural significance and it's one thing a landmark tree does, it's just to say these trees are culturally significant. we don't question the cultural significance of these trees that is why we had four meetings before putting up removal notices but it's a very political process and i'm not going to start high poth a sizing about how that would get approved but i do know that urban forestry council has a high standard of what a landmark tree it and it has been eight months and there's no action don that. >> thank you. >> thank you. vice president honda. >> >> so mr. buck, one question is similar to the president's question, if the area has already had a designation of being a landmark district, say thought that also effected the trees in that district as well? >> so respond to go that, no. the landmark tree programme is separate. there's one address on franklin where the site is considered a landmark and two street trees so it's a separate process ex they're completely different and. >> i heard that saint francis woods is trying to landmark their particular district and so they would have control of their trees. >> it's a different process from other landmark. >> the district has been a significant cultural director it does not effect the trees? >> >> literally it does not but i want to say it doesn't mean we're discounting the cultural importance of those trees but it has no legal standing as it remarks to the standing. >> we agree the significance and the importance to the community. as you mentioned, we are going 206 a budget shortfall. is there a protective measure that the trees do not get removed unless the budget allows for replacement. i mean, i would hate to see that the trees get removed and all of a sudden, oops, there's no money. >> absolutely. it's a great question. the funding is dire. but that said, we do have so we do believe that even with -- this is anticipating those bleak budgetary times. so these are numbers that we can commit to that we believe the budget will stand up to regardless of how many cuts we see coming. >> i mean, for me personally, i wouldn't feel -- i wouldn't approve this unless there was a condition that those trees would be replaced and last question, is shrink age. for a tree to survive and we discussed this many times on this board in san francisco it was quite the feat. we understand that young trees, especially 24 and 36 box sizes don't have a higher mortality rate. what happens in the cases of that mortality rate, are they replaced instantaneously or is there a process it has to go through and can you walk me through that as well? >> sure, commissioner, honda, chris puck, public works, bureau of urban forestry. we're proposing the installation of four protective stakes along with screens and so what we would do is unfortunately if the truck jumps the curb or a group of people try to tackle a single tree, we haven't got to that detail with the community but i would assume we can replant these replacement trees within one to two months if vandalized but again we're taking every measure to protect the trees when they are planted but we would have a very robust monitoring programme and we'll monitor the trees along with the watering captain so if they see an issue we can get to a ahead of time. >> that was part of condition as well? watering? >> no, replacement within two months if a tree is vandalized or abused or removed? >> correct. i want to say one month but the logistics, we may also work with community partners to have those trees replanted and so i could see a scenario where, if we suddenly had two or throw trees that needed to be replanted, if they had a set schedule that might put us into two months and not one month. a two-month minimum turn around time would give us just enough flexibility to make sure we're not over promising. >> thank you. >> we will now hear from commissioner swig. >> thank you, very much. first of all, i'd like to congratulate the public, the members of the public who include the appellants and i know they have many people behind them getting together in such a constructive fashion with buff and also mr. buck, thank you for being open to getting together with the public to reach what seems to be a constructive direction. my concern extends on commissioner honda's concerns. my concern is beyond the new plantings to the trees that will survive the cutting and i think you mentioned, mr. buck and it was mentioned also in the appellant's brief that a level of abuse, neglect put many of the trees at risk and ultimately which will resolve in their cutting them down over a many year period. how do you wrap into the direction of your plan and the care of the trees which are left. and to treat them, even though they might not be ever designated landmark trees, but to treat them like landmark trees and to ensure that they are treated properly and they will not fall into a state of neglect and sustain the goals of the public, which is to stay the cultural nature and importance of the neighbourhood. >> chris buck, public works, bureau of urban forestry. so that's a really great question and i really thank you for asking that because that's critical big picture information to understand that before the passage of street tree ff public works maintained one-third of the street trades in san francisco and we maintained 24th street. we maintained one-third of the street trees but then, due to budget cuts we went from a seven to a nine-year pruning cycle to 11 to 13 to a 13 to 15 year pruning cycle. that's what initiated the economy being tank in 2008. that initiated the department's response to relinquish and transfer maintenance responsibilities for just the one-third of street trees we maintain to adjacent property owners and so to answer your question, street tree sf that passed with something with a super high mandate is the mechanism, public works now receives $19 million a year of dedicated funding to maintain street trees. it's something we never had before. not when we maintained the one-third of the street trees. that is the political sea change which has changed. i'm saying the budget is going to get hit. is the amazing thing is this is a protected funding. it was voted and approved by the people and so it can't be undone unless there was a vote. after three years, public works will be responsible for maintaining those trees and not the adjacent property owners so we now have a plan of maintaining trees on a three to five year cycle and it includes early structural pruning and it also includes purchasing trees from a nursery that are not logged. we talk about those lollipop trees being planted. they literally looked like lollipops and the resulting structure is literally what we're still dealing with 40 years later is this hodge podge of branching and the us in reindustry has come a long way and we're starting with better structure trees and we had maintenance funding because the street tree sf and proposition e. that's why this is a different ball game than we've had before. that's why we will treat them as if they're landmark trees. potential landmark trees o of te future. >> thank you. commissioner tanner has a question. >> mr. buck, to return to president lazarus question around the landmark tree status, according to what was said, if the trees were to be land marked only hazardous trees could be removed, would that defense of hazardous a reply to those 33 trees that are supposed to be removed? that's a great question. some of them do. it depends on how you define a hazard. we have a landmark tree not too far away at cesar chavez ex there's a mortin bay figure on the front age of saint luke's hospital. it's a landmark tree. it just stands out. it's enormous. it doesn't mean that the grouping of trees doesn't have a very significant cultural stat status. it's going to be a hurdle that public works would be -- we would be having to advocate against landmarkings because of the it's not just the structural deficiency and the failures and it's the repeated side walk damage so there's factors that go into that but i the condition of the tree would have to be residents addressed and while they may not all meet the standard of a hazardous defined, many of them will. and i see that you remember representative from supervisor ronen's office i believe present and later on he can address whether or not the supervisor who is seen as a supervisor or the acting head of public works would need to be the one to initiate the applications for landmarks and that's correct and that's what you said earlier? >> correct. it's a member of the board of supervisors or a department head. it could be planning, public works. >> maybe you have the member of that office address if that has come up to that office to consider the landmarking process. on the removal list, it creates a has ar for pedestrians and people who are disabled and it has public works considered the rubberized innovative ways to try to bring harmony to the paving and the tree and obviously you can still have slope issues but at least eliminates the tripping hazard portion. >> yes, chris buck, public works. we really have considered all options. the rubberized sidewalks is not base work to support the rubberized sidewalk and we've done test cases to look at how they performed and ironically, or appropriately, our ada and accessibility coordinator is reviewed a lot of rubberized sidewalks and it has certain standards and then that department is like, well, it's just not -- it's not quite as easy as it seems. it's not. you are still cutting rots to get you, we still have to get raid relativ relatively level. without going into too great of detail, we're actively looking at anything like that, any industry trends that we think that could work anywhere in the city and especially here. we don't think it's a viable option for a number of different reasons. >> great. and i just want to review some of the notes i took regarding what sounds like public works is agreeing to wish removal of 33 trees, replacement of 145 trees. obviously some would be on 24th street but others would be in the vicinity because they wouldn't all fit within that same area on 24th street. there would be a process where the removal would happen and replacement within three months and there's going to be a completing one block and moves on to the next in terms of the sidewalk repair following closely on top of that and then some things about art making the wood and the trees available for art and perhaps decorative art on the stakes themselves surrounding each tree and it sounds like you did also say the website with the tree removal notices have been created or updated at the request of not just these a tell ants but is there anything else that we're missing or misunderstanding about what you have agreed to do with the community? >> thank you, chris buck, public works, bureau of urban forestry i'm not taking that away from appellant but i was the education coordinator at friends urban forest 20 years ago and asked how can we get a sense of what the city is proposing removed. the public asked me and i want to educate the public on what is going on city wide. now, because we had the passage of three tree sf we have a public information officer full time so this is one job to make sure the notices and we've been doing since october and more recently there was a request to let people know that those notices are removed from the website so we got that up there and we're looking into a way to archive them so they're not removed from the website we have images so that's one area we're continuing to look at. accessibility, we're committed to accessibility. we want to continue addressing those concerns. regarding the use of the trees in some sort of meaningful way, art projects, ceremony, ficus wood is not a great carving wood. it's a lightweight wood when it drys out. some of the examples they brought to us show that and having people write messages about the trees so we're totally open to the direction of the community on that and we're discussing there are constraints as some of the examples on a website. it's what you agreed to with the community in terms did the idea and the collaboration seems to be there. >> we're, yes. we're committed to also allowing colourful use of the stakes and the cross braces and the painting of them and their own signage and that as well. >> the trees, you didn't list the types which were maple and you have very based on the. >> we know 24th street will be 24-inch box size trees. there are times when species are not available and so we talked to the community group about and how we select species within reason so there is flexibility there. >> on the side of the trees. if it's ok, can we have a question to the representatives from supervisor ronen's office. >> i don't think it's a problem. can we finish up with mr. buck and make sure -- commissioner honda may have a question. >> are you finished for now commissioner tanner? voice president honda? >> just one last question. so, this is the first time i heard the determine lollipop tree and since several of us on this commission have put those things in in the '70s, so are you saying that partially the reason why a lot of these trees are having the issues they have is because of the condition that they were planted in or how we got them? >> sure, chris buck with public works. so, the nurseries want to grow as many trees in a limited amount of space as possible so very often -- people, you know it's also public perception when you buy a tree what should that tree look like? sort of a tall, thin, widely spaced branches was not what people had in mind and nurseries used to really sort of top, essentially top the trees. it said why does one divide into seven or 10 and that was literally because the nurse roman or woman, person, was cutting the top of the tree and it is induced lateral growth that has not been monitored closely producing these competing stems so and literally the tree started on the wrong foot from day one. through no one's fault. no one is pointing fingers but that's what we mean by a lollipop tree. >> thank you for the education. >> thank you. i believe commissioner tanner has a question for mr. monhay from supervisor ronen's office. >> yes, thank you for being here. i wanted to follow-up on the landmark tree process. the specific question would be whether the supervisors' office has received requests for landmarking trees and what has been the response top that request or considerations regarding that type of request if it was needed. >> absolutely. can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> thank you. >> we're completely supportive of the process and i that i what would hope as a result of this determination by the board there could be a committed partnership from buck to work with our office in the community and pursuing the remainder tree and it's something that we're open to and i think really reflects the significance and the value of these trees to the corridor so our office is committed to that process if we have a commitment from buff to partner with us to do the same. commissioners tanner, your earlier question, if there's some incorporation by reference of the terms in that document that outline understanding that would be a way to honour the commitment and the agreements and at least preliminarily needed. >> that's a great suggestion is something we would look to do with the landmark process to be clear, the supervisor is interested in moving forward with the remaining these would remain from the original group, i don't know how many, if it's removed i can't remember how many would remain but those remaining trees, supervisor ronen might consider those as landmarks, is that correct? >> absolutely. >> i guess any other in sight from your work with this group or groups in terms of these terms it sounds like they're favorable and the supervisors supportive of the terms outlined by mr. buck? >> >> yeah, i mean, this is a conversation and one that proved fruitful in many ways and i think the important part here is ensuring there's adequate follow through on the commitments outlined here so our office is going to be monitoring the situation and trying to provide as much support as we have to at this process and ensuring that these commitments are going beyond paper and they come to life in fruition and especially in these difficult budgetary times and it's someoning we use to circumvent it to renege on those commitments and the possibilities is something that we want to see. >> great, thank you, very much. >> >> thank you, so we are now moving on too public comments and president lazarus, i know we have more than 30 people here for public comment. did you want to limit it to two minutes? >> yes, we will do two minutes each of public comment. >> so, start with -- (inaudible). >> ok. >> and the status of the urban forestry, and it's my understanding the board of supervisors is being presented for the goals. >> we lost her? >> i should just make a note and we'll go onto the next person and she'll call back in. >> i can't hear me. >> go ahead. >> did you hear what i said. >> it's going to be voted and public works and we separated from all the security and the provisions over that department and the other departments and zero and in addition, the criteria and it was established in 2014 and and it was no longer and that is is not valid in my opinion. and egregious in the first place. the removal of all those ficus trees and at the beginning because we believe that it's unclear and over the trees. >> 30 seconds. >> thank you, that's all i have to say. >> thank you. >> and (inaudible). hello? >> and i'm going to turn my screen off. so my name is roz and i come to you as an indigenous woman who is and i live in the and ridicule and by these i shall not regular bait my preportions and some you're at all and to the eyes of the man of imagination, the city war on ficus trees has got to stop. >> we just lost her. i don't hear anything. >> it happens. >> can you make a note of her time, alec and if she calls back, ok, so tanya wants to provide public comment. she's in the panelist queue. >> i'm here. >> thank you, please go ahead. you have two minutes. >> so i am here to for anger for the project that will destroy 30 to 50 trees in the san francisco mission district a neighbourhood that's been through a lot of change over the years due to again tra indication which is home to a large group of under represented individuals and we need to look out for their best interest and it's a known fact that low income neighbourhoods and communities are colour, like those in the san francisco mission district, specifically calle24, generally experiences higher levels of air pollution and separate and pollution and the air pollution and there are fair greater benefits than just clean air and reducing the chances of vulnerable neighbourhoods by 20% and they save consumers electric costs and a tree after a few years is worth $250,000 from a professor of university of calcutta and it has many other benefits. however, far too often, these communities most in deed do not have access access to them. right now the mission does, we have some tree equity in the commission when so many other communities don't. and help them to purchase. and then have to help these people grow as big as the ones and i know because i work in the project and experience and the it makes and what guarantees does the community have. will it create a better situation of the one that use and we only have 11 years to fight climate change. why make this decision now when we have -- >> that's time. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so lesley. >> hell oh you have two minutes. i'd like to share my screen. >> ok. >> one moment. >> alex s. she anna ten de. >> i live near 24 street and a few of us got together to create a call to action 90 second video in the spirit of that and the community coming together, i'd like to share thank you. we both neighbours and so, here we go. let's see if i can share screen. it's doing something funny. >> we can hold the fine. >> let's do it. >> a minute and 16 seconds. can someone assist her with the audio. >> it's on her computer. if someone can assist her with that setting, that would be much appreciated. >> i'm not sure what setting. >> on the bottom right at bottom where it says share screen. there's some dots on the right side and -- >> is there a problem with the audio? >> i don't understand -- >> in zoom at the bottom of the screen, click share computer sound. >> is that for lesley? >> yeah, for lesley. >> oh. >> i'm sorry, everyone. this didn't go well. >> you can just share a youtube link with someone's sound that is working and they can play with you. >> three dots at bottom. >> ok, thank you. >> i don't see the three dots so do you want to just finish you have what up to say ms. freeman. >> >> when you share the screen, there's three dots. >> we're not seeing that. >> you can't see that. >> can i ask the board to let me share my screen to show how this is done. >> i feel like we need to move on. i mean, yeah. i mean, i think we need to move on. we can bring you back but why don't you work on it and maybe you can separately chat with zack or maybe get on the phone with alec. >> that's great. i'll do that and i'll be here. thank you. >> we'll come back to you. >> you can call me if you want. >> thank you. >> so we'll now. >> she's in the panel. >> ok. >> ms. powers -- >> hi. >> welcome. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you so much. i am the executive director of (inaudible) and we have 100 feet of storefront on 24th street between between york and ham shire street and we have four trees on our property and we have three and a half trees on our property. i've been here for eight years, over eight years, and i love the trees and i love the trees and i've been working in living in the community for a long time and they're beautiful and they're shady and they provide a lot. i have spent thousands and thousands of dollars managing the trees on our property and i spent $10,000 in february to replace my sewer pipes because the tree roots invade my viewer pipes. i have to repair my roof and clean my roof all the time because we have four trees that are dropping leaves and branches on the trees. i've seen the branches fall on windy days and last i showed the tree in june and that is part of the tree that fell in june. another tree last year completely fell down close tore bryant treat so i very mixed about the trees and i'm in the very unusual position because i have four trees on my property. so, it's very concerning -- i don't want the trees to be cut down. i don't see the city's investments in the trees to probably manage the trees and if the trees don't get cut down, who will invest the money 245 is goinitwill take to take care ofe trees. someone going to get hurt from a branch, a tree falling. >> ok. >> thank you. >> i have a request from someone. hold on, please. let me find them. >> roz came back. >> ok. >> someone was going to go next if that was possible. let's just finish roz arbell since she started out. >> do you mind if i just provide the content and the q&a? >> ms. arbell -- >> can you hear me? >> yes, please go ahead. how much time does she is have left? >> 45 seconds. >> can i just leave the content of what i was saying in the q&a. >> you need to just tell us right now because we aren't reading the q&a. >> just read it right now. >> you can send an e-mail to the board with your comments and we can put it in the public record if you wish. >> yeah. i don't even know where i got cut off to be quite honest. who did i send it to? >> you can send an e-mail to the board of appeals at sfgov.org and we'll take that and put it in the record and you have one minute to speak right now if you wish? >> i'm just pro fer to just send it rather than be cut off again. >> it's a risk. >> thank you. >> alec, can you call the next person, please. >> yes, hold on, please. zico and i'm sorry if i mispronounced your name. >> i'm here. thank you, you have two minutes to speak. >> my two minutes. i am a san francisco born and raised. my two daughters are also san francisco. i believe here for so many years. my comment is to do as much as you can and trust science and if it's correct and it's necessary to remove the trees, do that and if not, then leave the trees. respect the life. and once it's done, can we just make sure we landmark the streets and we can have the streets for the future generation. it's very simple. i think that saving the lives of the tree can be something not seen as important but if we can save the trees, we can save the trees. the tremendous needs to be removed because people have problems seeing their properties and to do that and once it's done, can we make sure that the life of trees will be saved for the future generations. that's my comment. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> so we will now hear from the next participant. i believe louise amoya. can you provide him to the video, please. >> yes. >> hello, can the committee hear me? >> yes, we can hear you. >> great, this is actually alexander cotton, forgive me, i'm using a business account and logged in on zoom. my name is alexander cotton. and i've been a resident of the mission district for 14 years. i just wanted to call into express a, my thankfulness for the other neighbours and the residents of the community who have clearly put a lot of time in working out what looks like a very in-depth compromise so i do appreciate that that work has been done and i would just support any maybe that number gets down to 28. i don't want anybody to be hurt by a falling tree branch but i want to echo and respect everything that everyone else has said around the cultural and environmental value of the trees. so, if we can use the landmarking process to save just a few more trees and put the investment no those and i want to thank the members spending their time on this evening listening and i have spent the time for years dealing with this issue. thank you for your time. >> thank you, very much. >> ok -- >> susan needs to be promoted to video, please. >> hold on, please. [please stand by] >> if things need to slow down, i don't think that the public is at any great risk. there have been some failures from trucks driving into trees or just branches falling where no one was hurt. i think slowing down to allow the possibility of some trees being landmarked is a really good idea. when buses came to our neighborhood originally, they were gonna cut down 39 trees. now that has been reduced to 25. i don't want to discourage them from removing the trees, but it begs the question, how dangerous were they really? [indiscernible] >> your video froze, i believe. i don't hear any more audio. >> a kind of makes you wonder, how reasonable is the criteria that they are using about how dangerous these trees are? that is number one. i think this is something to keep in mind as they are going through the rest of the city saying these ficus trees are really dangerous. i'm sorry, i am moving around because my internet connection. that's time? >> yes. thank you. >> okay. alec, maybe we can hear from marie now. she needs to be promoted to the video. miss sorensen? >> she has been added. >> hello, are you there? is she part of the panel? >> yes, she is. >> we can't hear you. >> got it. for me it all started when d.p.w. came and wanted to wholesale and cut out all our trees. and i thought, somebody wants a tree contract with mohammed because he was so adamant that all the trees had to come out. guess what? he is now under indictment for the f.b.i. i really called it a wash. in times of covid, and the fact that the sky is falling, why are we taking out trees? why are we not planning all the spaces that need to trees? to me it's just crazy. one chris was giving his presentation he started talking about how they are going to be sensitive to the murals that are painted on buildings and i also thought, well, that's kind of interesting. several months ago they quickly went through and started planting trees. ones on york street where there is a beautiful mural on york and 24th, and other spots. so now you are going to be sensitive to not planting where there are murals and they will talk to the community. one of the other things i want to talk about is when we had our tree planted years ago, one of my neighbors came across -- okay came across a street and said to me, i will not plant a tree. it is too expensive. why not have the city give a precedent to every single business, every homeowner that has a tree plan and say we will give you 50 gallons a month just to plant and water your tree. why can't something like that be done so the burden is also -- >> time. >> that is time. >> thank you for your comments. >> we have a collar whose phone number and in 1524. >> yes. that is me. i am a resident of 24th street i live across the street where the branch fell on the car a few weeks ago. i do believe that is the cause of them not being retained and it being set up for sale. the trees provide neighbors shade. they provide my neighbors a good view. the cover up the structural improvements that need to be made on many buildings on the street. this is right by general hospital. many people are unsheltered and the trees provide them shelter. this is what they can't have with their large canopy. this also supports the wildlife and ecosystem of the neighborhood. it helps with temper could -- temperature control. there is a notable difference between the sunny side and the shade of the tree. i proposed that you listen to the advocates. i do trust the expertise of the employees, but with the new developments going up across the street from my house and all of this, i'm worried about the gentrification and i just want to have a good time in my neighborhood. thank you for your time. >> thank you. will you please repeat your name for the record? >> leah. >> thank you so much. if you are here to provide public comment, if you could raise your hand. if you called and, you pressed star start nine. thank you. if you are joining by zoom, that is the lower right-hand portion. i think we have freddie coronado >> okay. mr. coronado? alec, maybe we can move the next person sooner so we don't have to wait. like while one person is speaking we can move them over. >> hi, i am answering e-mails, too. >> thank you. >> i am here. >> thank you. you have two minutes. >> hello. i live in san francisco. i ask that the city of san francisco listens to the communities. it reminds me of mexico city. every time i walk onto fourth street it reminds me of back home. these beautiful trees provide shade. most of the trees are saved or landmarked. i have witnessed a delay for the sidewalks and tree basins along the corridor. it has been more on walkable then it was before. please listen to what the community wants, what the mission wants and do what you can. thank you. >> thank you. >> leslie freeman? >> okay. please go ahead. >> okay. i am back. >> okay. >> yes. i am leslie freeman. thank you. i will share a 92nd video that some neighbors and i put together. i wrote the script with our filmmaker. i will try this again. thank you for your patience. >> i will pause time until you are all set up. >> okay. >> here we go. >> check the audio and see if it works. >> yep. >> okay. your time starts still can't hear the audio. >> you can hear the audio? >> no. if it plays on your computer, it should play on zoom. you should be able to hear it. >> i do. i will try one more time and then we will give up. >> is it playing through your headphones or is it on your phone? >> it is playing through my computer. >> maybe your headphones are on it? >> i'm sorry, we need to move on thank you. >> all right. >> let's hear from phoenix firestarter, please? >> thank you so much. i am a horticulturalist in san francisco and i know these trees were not the best trees to plant these are the trees that we have and they are very mature. i hope that we can preserve the ones that we can. that said, they have decades of growth and it is something we may never see again in our lifetime. i would love to see time and money invested in keeping these trees, which are very much a part of our city. when i first started this i thought, you know, maybe maybe we can fade them out. can we face them out? so it is not so stark. take the worst 10% the first year et cetera. the more i talked to the locals, they are really special trees to the people who live here. one of the things that they do provide are the -- is the shade. they shield the buildings from u.v. light. these homeowners and business owners are paying for the trees. if the trees weren't there, they would be paying more to keep up their places. the trees protect the buildings. thank you for your time. please consider leaving as many of them as possible. i understand some of them have to go. thank you for your time. >> thank you. i see we do have a hand raised from the arborist that was fired by the appellant. you can speak during their time. right now we are on public comment. the next comment her, please go it -- the next speaker, please go ahead. >> hello. >> hey,. >> i will try where others have failed. i shared the link in the comments. i'm wondering if zac was able to use it before and you can play it so we can sidestep the technical difficulties. >> okay, is somebody sharing the video? >> it seems like zac knows how to do that. is it possible to hand that off? >> alex, do you see it in the chat? >> thank you. >> i will share this and i will start the time. is that what you wish? >> yes, please. >> the time is starting. >> please fullscreen it. can you please fullscreen? [indiscernible] >> they give roots to our neighborhood. we mustn't be satisfied but we must take the appropriate action to preserve the life, culture and history of our neighborhood. we can do this by pruning trees on a two year cycle to provide the care they need. we do think the number of trees removed increases -- [indiscernible] -- and committing to replanting within three months. this is an opportunity for us to demonstrate the brazilians, sustainability by providing the support needed to preserve culture and iconic beauty in our neighborhood and promote the health of all who live in it. if this matters to you, raise your voice july 15th. the information is linked below. the city is proposing to remove -- [indiscernible] >> okay. i think the video is over. >> i don't know what happens. >> we need to move on. we have a caller who blocked their i.d. you can go ahead and provide public comment now. >> hello? >> please, go ahead. you have two minutes. please identify yourself. >> my name is cornelia. i am a mission resident. i also am a community garden or in the mission and a landscaper. i am a watering person. we are here in honor of all of the ancestors. although san francisco does have the smallest canopy of any major city in the u.s., we also have more trees than we do humans. i want to honor them and it seems to me that d.p.w. is seeking corruption. they don't seem to be up to the task of managing the trees over the past many decades of their life. while i do believe that the community can help to water the trees, i don't think we can go ahead with that plan until we have gone through the land marking and held to a higher standard for the value of life because the message that we get loud and clear is the disposability of life. i will use my last 30 seconds to agree with other people who have spoken that this is not -- we cannot hide behind this screen forever. trees are more than data. breeding able to breathe fresh air matters and please do the right thing. thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from sarah k. sarah? >> hi. >> welcome. >> my name is sarah and i am a teacher at mission hi -- at mission high school and they really care about and love these trees. i recognize it is a complex issue with a lot of opinions on either side, but i just wanted -- i've never done this before. i have never given a public comment. i didn't even think that i would speak today, but the trees mean a lot to me. it feels like a really important thing right now when we are considering our values and the things that we want to preserve and the world we want to create the future as we are having this moment of pause to think about our lives. i just really urge folks that have power to make this decision to consider saving those trees and redeeming those trees. they have party absorbed a lot of emotion of the city and people walking through there. i think it's something to keep. that is all. >> thank you so much. as anyone else here for public comment? i don't see any hands raised. we have a phone number ending in 6885. did you want to speak? hello? if you want to provide public comment, please raise your hand. star nine if you called in. if you are here on zoom, zoom, annie, how about any? i am not seeing anyone else who raised their hand. deborah? how about sheila? we will put you on video. sheila? >> can you hear me? >> thank you. welcome. please, go ahead. >> i sent a comment by text, but i am not sure if it will be recorded. i just wanted to say i am a mission resident. i think those trees -- the explanation for why they can't be landmarked wasn't entirely clear to me because trees haven't been landmarked and landmarked neighborhoods before. i would like to hear that there has been sufficient exploration of doing that. i come from a city where they took down the trees on the main street. there were different kinds of trees. london pines, i think. the street has never been the same. [indiscernible] i would urge you to really consider because these majestic trees really are the heart of the area. thank you. >> thank you. okay. if you want to speak in public comment, raise your hand. armando, are you here? armando vasquez? okay. i don't see any of your hands raised. i am concerned because i don't want to right -- lose out. esther? alec, maybe you can go over how people can raise their hand on zoom? >> there is a button. i think it is on the shared screen application. or you can go to your name. >> esther? esther him? okay. sarah benjamin? we will put you on the video. one moment. >> i've got it on there. >> okay. >> miss benjamin? is she in the panelists? >> she is. >> sarah benjamin, please, go ahead. welcome. you have two minutes. >> can you hear me? >> yes. >> great. i am sarah benjamin and i would like to lend my support for the trees. i think the trees have such a personality that is really unmatched in a lot of of the city and the mission district really benefits a lot from having those trees as a lot of other people have mentioned. the benefits are from the shade, the clean air, and the natural beauty. it really makes that street so memorable and so beautiful to walk down as opposed to a lot of other streets around there. i would like to echo the many sentiments about keeping the trees and pruning them appropriately and making sure that all of the trees are able to retain their branches without falling down like the one on the car. i think with proper pruning and attention and also maybe having some kind of an e-mail that somebody can tell you if the branch is not doing well, kind of like if you see something, say something. i'm all about safety and i would like to lend my support. thank you. >> thank you so much. are there any other public comments? please raise your hand. i think we have everyone. i don't see anyone raising their hands. i see president lazarus. >> if we have concluded public comment, i will recommend we take a 10 minute break before returning for the rest of the hearing. >> okay, great. we will return at 7:35 p.m. >> yes, >> we are finishing public comment and we'll hear from debra galagos. >> thank you for making the space available just to share my sincere and humble comments. i'm impressed by the presentations made today at the meeting and all community organizing that is gone in call e 24 to honor and our trees. from a spiritual point of view and how trees are also alive, just like all of us. they breathe and pro us to have fresh air and so in hearing about the environmental i am pact report, i think what we're advocating for in replanting as many more trees as possible would be deeply appreciated. i just stand in solidarity with my community to save the trees so thank you very much. >> thank you so much. so, we are now moving on to rebuttal. and you have three minutes. >> i would appreciate to go after the next person since i was not ready and i didn't know the rebuttal was coming up next and i would appreciate it to defer to the next person first. >> mr. klipp, are you ready to go? >> you have three minutes. >> yeah, i mean, the only thing i would have to add is that i would really like to, as i said in my closing remarks i would make sure it's pinned down in terms of what to expect and when to expect it and how things are going to be done. i know that there's been a 75% of the a conversation around that and i think hopefully the commissioners have enough of an idea of what is being proposed here to reduce the amount of trees proposed for removal and increase the amount of trees planted in the neighborhood with calle 24 and i want to call out all of the community activists and the work that's gone into it this is a model for how we can do of austerity and perhaps really turn things around and put ourselves in a better position and i also really appreciated the comments but i didn't catch your name but the teacher said as we sit back in this time of -- >> we'll hear from -- >> good evening, commissioners. cal lows, on behalf of calle24, we'd like to address a few things that were mentioned by the representative from buff and assert and really emphasize before committing action that's may lead to permanent and devastating results for the history and and the community to conduct a transparent responsible and diligent qualification as landmark trees and that regardless of whether or not it's viewed as a political process, that everybody here would agree that this community of color is deserving of this respect and this opportunity. and if we're talking about the removal of the 30 trees that were mentioned, the urban forestry council set fourth within the ordinance for what constructor duties a hazardous tree. and so these trees are truly being proposed for removal, that in the interest of equity and transparency and accountability, that they follow section 810 subsection f-1 of the urban forestry guidance for landmark trees and that there shall be a written consideration and findings as to how these trees constitute a hazard tree pursuant to section 802 subsection 0 of the urban forestry ordinance and just to make sure that we're not authorizing the removal of a tree unless it's necessary and there are criteria within section 802 for what a hazardous tree is and i won't go on to read those but just to say that there's a clear process that i would ask that this consideration be done in partnership with a council in a community-based planning process to really make sure we're doing this in a diligent way and disrespecting the ability for a marshallized community to partner with the city and the various department and understanding and being witties that have existed for years and for the community that is there and you will. >> there were conversations held after the understanding of how commit one person to helping move this process and engage a community based planning process with calle 24 to see this is moving along because these communities are not as well resources add other well resources and in advance of the process so i hear you on wanting to ensure that the criteria are used and the evaluation of removal and i just want to be clear and part of that process is making written findings. you know, on the factors that are related to landmarking trees and one of them is if it had historical appreciation and there's a process and and the community in making sure that we're doing this especially knowing, you know, their knowledge of trees and characteristics and adding whatever support they can to that process and then, you know, just one other thing and just saying for the other 30 that are being removed, to still require a written finding as to how these trees would constitute a tree pursuant to subsection. >> >> there's a big difference and it would effect potentially what we do at the board. so, i don't know who wants to respond by that or whether we should wait for it and i was and i am. >> the thing that i would say this is carlos, that the thing i would say with regards to that to engage for those trees as well because i believe the community deserves the opportunity to make their case and the urban forestry council why this tree should be proposed for landmarking status in con running with the support oconjur and whatever happens after that pros if those are approved it's not as though you, there's no pathway to remove or cut down the trees it's just saying we're going to use the high he can wet tee standard that they are pursuant to subsection and so i would say in doing due diligence and maintaining equity for this community, putting all the trees through the process would be the most ideal thing and responsible to this community and what i propose the earlier was another compromise we could do if that didn't work for the report. >> thank you. >> it's differing driver's license and that would be the rev prance and i've heard one person -- i heard they will landmark the trees before they're removed and i hear mr. buck saying, well, that an additional process and perhaps all the trees are not considered hazardous and so, the public works would be against doing the landmarking beforehand and supportive after, again, it's the supervisor brings that forward. that's my interpretation. >> well i think it's going to be part of our discussion. >> i don't know whether you want today make this later now but it's contextual to now. we were offered a slide by one of the appellants and in the context of the the maintenance plan and with these trees and it was in zone f or something like that and i don't think that we should be dealing with the landmark issue tonight. i'm supportive of some form of really landmarking and so i'm not dismissing that option and i think it was just pointed out there are many ideas on the subject and that wonderful map presented a really a natural formations for the potential of a landmarked area or landmark forest where any tree, which is in that grid should be part of that land mork and what we're going to face, my feeling is, that unfortunately trees will come and go and that is port nature but if we landmark that territory trees, or legacy trees but it was something i was going to bring up in discussion. >> we should continue and hear the rebuttal. >> we'll hear from kendra shaitsh. >> would it be possible to yield my time to the arborist, christopher campbell? >> yes, i would like to do that. >> mr. campbell. >> hello, my name is christopher campbell i'm a community member and arborist of 18 years and qualified tree risk assessor and i did provide the report for the community there for the 1 hub 10 trees along the 24 street corridor. i just have a few comments. one, i would like to say i'm pleased to see the cooperation between bo buff and the communi. it's really moving in a great direction there. i'd like to stress and comment on the importance of the pruning presspecification and the prunif the trees to be retained. the success of those trees really depends on the pruning press indications and who and how they're applied and the oversight of that. including the frequency of maintenance. i'd also like to make one other point is that this group of trees is an old group of trees and they have dereflects and they do fail and when they fail, those are pretty large components parts and that can be catastrophic and in my opinion, waiting to prune to me it really only makes sense to landmark trees that have been designated to retain as the other ones have been designated as hazards that are not acceptable. that's my comment, thank you. >> thank you. >> ok, are you ready? >> >> yes. >> you have three minutes. thank you. >> thank you. we're going into three hours and i'm in a lot of pain. this board is not taking into consideration the he is peck that peoplaspect ofpeople with e been left out of this process. it's in violation of 8.2000 of title 2 of the american with disabilities act and we were denied access to the original hearing for these trees and the board doesn't even talk about it and seniors and people with disabilities were not given full access and that is issue number one of why this should be denied and reason number two, is that the vice president of the board is personal friends with chris buck. he has admitted as much and it will have an extreme bias. this board is biased. and that is not a way to enact democracy. reason three, mohammad nuru who issued this order was arrested by the f.b.i. for corruption. that's a great reason to deny this order. this is a lot of technical difficulties, a lot of challenges from people to attend and leave comments and play two people tried to play video and couldn't and weren't able to do it and we tried to get extensi extensions because it's crazy to do this in covid. it can be extended. i hope this board can consider that. i'm disappointed that district 9 hilary ownen did not it was disgusting hearing him coach questions from chris buck and dpw has never taken disability needs into account which is why we were included from this process and it took many months to get an accessible tree notification page which i will share with you all right now and it is this page right here which i had to fight very hard for because they didn't care about disabled people and i talked with attorneys. chris buck has spoken up that these trees will be cut down to make room for luxury condos, this is about -- and this neighborhood will be whitened and i am i'm in strong support and this work for the community so keep this as a diverse i would like to see chris buck and officials who make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year take a 10% calorie cut to support our trees and our urban environment. our tax dollars are paying $300.000 for the department of public works to cut down our trees. thank you. >> thank you. we will now move onto the mr. buck. you have 1 minutes. >> before that, i have a question. >> i'm sorry, commissioner tanner. and is the access to the hearing that you are saying you were denied because the notice was too small but the location of the tree was too high but that is what you are referring to. >> if my appeals brief, i detailed extreme detail i was sick and able to leave my home to see that notes and i was not provided online. >> i do understand it and about but i want to see in addition to that it was the reference to the location and the size of the actual notice that was the physical notice. >> correct. >> right. >> thank you very much. >> and then i had a question for our city attorney, if you are available. >> if you could address and just reminds myself and the members of public what constitutes a conflict of interest when the matter is before the board. >> conflict of interest that would require someone to recuse themselves from a matter would be something where the member of the board has a financial interest in the matter before the board is considering. a personal relationship would not constitute a required conflict of interest and just to mean the member of the board can still consider the matter in a fair manner. >> thank you, i appreciate that. that's my question. >> thank you. so, mr. buck, you have 12 minutes for rebuttal? >> chris buck. i just wanted to reiterate again, all the hard work that folks have put into it and on the parts of all sides. the work by christopher campbell to work with the community and help produce that report. and mr. campbell and for sure these are trees that are, we do have concerns about them. we've had two failures in the time that it's taken to go through this year, year-and-a-half process. and regarding landmark trees, i was a little confused and the landmark existing trees versus remaining trees and it seems like there's been a few points to that. i was not really prepared to speak to that tonight. it hasn't come up in our appellant meetings and we're available to clarify any questions. just to reiterate the other point to clarify is that we plant 50 replacement trees along 24th street. the 145 replacement trees are klein you haddin youincluding te 95 with the 50. we're trying to get to a minimum of 14 but we'r 145 but we're coo more. if it goes well, we're committed to meeting that need and going beyond that if we can achieve that. those are the primary things i want today focus on. again, i just, it has taken a long point to get here and we're definitely focused on public safety concerns and we're implementing treat tree sf to maintain all the treat trees in san francisco. we're open for customers. >> yes, mr. buck. it was raised during public comment and throwing around all night long about the danger of ficus trees and can you give me a brief underlying brief summary of failures of ficus trees over the last 24 month period on the streets of san francisco and the result of their failure. >> sure. thank you commissioner swig. chris buck with public works. i don't have specific numbers in front of me but it's gone back many years in terms of if you were to google ficus trees san francisco, we have experienced a lot of ficus trees as arborist, christopher campbell, is the word trees and the sin essing and many of the trees in four decades, 40-years-old and they're beginning to age and their large stems are beginning to fail city wide. it's something that's been happening all across the city and regardless of neighborhoods and it's challenging when it comes to a neighborhood that's already experiencing disproportionate impacts and environmental, social issues. >> would you estimate that it was failures of in between five and 10 or 10 and 20? >> five u ficus failure, we've n the last couple years 50 failures city wide. >> that was the answer. you don't have to go into it. i just wanted to point out to those and think that there's a contrivance to the danger of the freeze that your number that there's been at least 50 failures is something to be concerned with. >> commissioner, that representative for -- >> we can't have people -- we can't have people calling out in the middle of the hearing. if you have a -- we current taking questions anymore. or comments. if the commissioners have a question of you, they will ask it. >> he answered my question. i'll yield back. >> thank you so i believe president lazarus has a questi question. >> i believe it was in your presentation earlier that there was a commitment as to the timing and the plan for this that it would be essentially block by block so is that something we should potentially consider in our deliberations? >> thank you president lazarus, i want to be clear, we're talking about a three-month -- when we initiate we'll remove trees and stumps before we allow the contractor to advance to the next block so that we don't have all tree removed all stumps in the process of being removed so it's a way for us to try to phase this work to some degree. we're not saying the entire corridor will start and stop within three months but by blocks we won't allow them to move them before they have the stumps on the block which they start with it and it can start moving west. so it's a throw-month to when that block had trees removed and stumps removed, we would replant the replacement trees and any new trees and vacant spots within three months as they move down. >> so the replanting doesn't occur before the next block has the trees cut but within three months of any particular block having its trees out they will be replanted, am i correct? >> correct, commissioner. we want to -- we need to make a number of sidewalk repairs and repair a sidewalk and cut and shift some of the locations on each block. so, it may not seem like a big give but it's a way to make sure that we can have our -- we will have our cement team, sidewalk repair team repair sidewalks and prepare new basins as soon as the tree work is done. trees will also be pruned at the time. tree removal and tree pruning, the above ground tree work, the stumps are done then the team, the contractor moves to the next block and we begin doing the finishing work, sidewalk repair and planting, it's not all done within three months before we go to the next block but it will allow us to follow with time commitment per block. >> decision i'm still a little confused. when you've done all that -- i mean, is there any guarantee that when the trees is removed there's something planted within x amount of time following that? >> yes. it should be three months. >> that's what i wanted to clarify. thank you. so commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> commissioners. vice president honda. >> i'm sorry, press lazarus. >> i believe this item has been continued twice and i am the commissioner that motioned it both times to be moved up so that we would have more outreach and participation from all parties here. which it seems that we have. also, prior to this hearing, i mentioned during a prior hearing that i had noticed that a large tree had been removed on 24th, of course the permit and in front of a church on 24th street. it seems terrible. it seems like it was tragic. it was like a desert. we're not just talking about a row of trees here. i believe kind of, you know, not to get too emotional but it's really the heart of the community. this is where carnival starts, 24th street has been important for this community for so many years. i'm not really supportive of the removal, especially at this time during covid. we're a budget crisis already. and yes, i witnessed a large ficus actually lose its limb personally over the weekend on pine street, which actually discovered the street and hit a car and it's an assumed liability and this is where we have to weigh out fellow commissioners, is that assume liability what is it worth? to me, to make 24th street a desert for the next five to 10 years is pretty tough. and it's hard to fathom. i know not all of this on this board are from san francisco. i have been on this street since i was young. when those trees went up. to me, even to me that i don't live in the district, it's still a comfort to me. so, personally, i don't support the removal of these trees at this time. that is just my comments. >> commissioner swig. >> clearly these trees are part of a -- they are part of an iconic over all iconic neighborhood we're faced with is the reality of mother nature and the tree failure and it's inevitable these trees are going to fail at some point whether we like it or not. and what special about tonight is there seems sob a plan that is showing some significant collaboration and agreement between the neighborhood and buff and although i don't deny what commissioner honda said, this is an opportunity, this is tay freeze frame, a photograph in time where we can get, we can get started on a long-term project of dealing with those trees in a constructive fashion. like i said before, i thought the strategy of looking at these trees in a grid was fabulous and because identified planting and maintenance and a long-term view and as long as that exists right now and there's some agreement between most parties, man, i would grab it. like like tearing down trees and i don't like cutting down trees but this is a moment in time where this is the right time to be to begin the renovation of that area. in the context of what i brought up before, as far as landmar landmarking, again, in the same spirit, there is identified a very clear demarcation of what represents the urban forest that is around 24th street and i don't suggest that this board and could make a legal proclamation that these trees will be landmark and i would highly recommend that the board of supervisors take this and hilary ronen take this under consideration to move the concept of landmarking the whole grid as opposed to any group of any shelter i differ with my fellow commissioners vice president in that let's cease the moment and get this project started because it's not a next-year project it's probably a decade long project. >> thank you. >> so i would conquer with commissioner swig. i think we have an opportunity to take appropriate and i'm very impressed with the work that's gone on and the amount of time and effort to come up with a plan that's been presented to it that has the buy in of a number of different constituencies. and so to the extent that we can spell out what is needed and maybe commissioner danner took the best notes on what might go into a motion, but i'm supportive of what i would call a very reasonable compromise and would be willing to support a motion in that direction. >> ok. thank you. commissioner tanner. >> i just want to speak to the appellants and the community members who brought this forward and who spoke to us tonight. i think it's really remarkable and i know, it's hard and i think we all feel like commissioner honda, where it's just how can we be taking these trees down but through the work of the community, it went from 77 proposed trees to be removed to 52 and now it's 33. so, just in the sense of scale and magnitude of what this effort and organizing and work has led to and then the creativity and the real ingenuity and rolling up the slopes to comwatering plan to tm like 50 to what would have been 150 but we put some money into the watering apparatus trees and i mean it's really remarkable and i hope it's not lost that even with the loss of the 33 trees that may go forward, that there is going to be some gain and it will take time for these trees to establish and to join in with the others. i hope that it is something that in 20 years and 30 years and 50 years, folks are able to look back and recall the new trees, just like we're looking back at the ficus that came in in the 70s and someone will look back at these trees from what may be 2020 or 2021 and i'm sure covid is having its impact at a lot of work at public works, i want to thank those who put their 20 zoom meetings or something that was shown on the slide. that's a lot of meetings and a lot of work. i want to recognize that. i would be interesting in making a motion. i think what i might want to hear from the fellow commissioners is, what we want to have in it because there were everything from the number of trees to box sizes and some species still needed to be decided and it seems like there's on going deliberations but i think it's fine but i don't know how specific it will be with a different number of trees in our usual motions, isn't it like three, it's 145. so there may be some need to have some flexibility. i think commissioner santacana so i will stop before i make my motion. >> thank you commissioner tanner. i want to echo everything that you all have said about the really inspiring level of collaboration that's occurred here and i think unlike commissioner honda and my view we need to honor that work has gone into this. and to honor the efforts that have been made by the community and the people who are most directly involved in this and to reach a compromise that addresses the different problems. one comment i have, every party before us is freed to make whatever argument this is they kneel they need to make but i just want to put a little flag on this because we frequently have litigants here who want to discuss unproven allegations regarding people in our communities or people on this board and those types of allegations are not effective and they are not persuasive and for that reason alone i would not recommend litigants spend their precious time before the board on them and their precious pages in their briefs. again, people can spend their time and space on whatever they want and they should. but, i would just encourage the people who appear before us to focus on what will persuade us which are facts that can be proven and relevant to the question that we're trying decide. >> thank you. commission swig. >> yes, this is commissioner tanner response. you do a wonderful job historically of running down details very, very nicely and i would suggest you make your motion is to run down these details just in the context of the number of trees to be removed and the number of trees to be planted and a general confirmation of mr. buck's claim that they will go block by block and not move to another block before they're completed with -- now moved to another block before they've completed their mission on initial block or those following. to whatever notes you've taken which i know are always very good, because i sit next to you, generally, i would suggest that you just run down that laundry list and incorporate them no a motion and i would support it. with the exception of, again, i don't think it's for us to discuss landmarking these trees tonight but rather put that fourth as just something that we wowewould not be against. >> absolutely that suggestion, mr. buck, can i ask you a question which is just how many trees are going to be replaced on calle should 24, how many trees will be there? >> sure. chris buck with public works, bureau of urban forestry so the 24 straight proper, we would be removal of 33 trees with replacement with 50 as identified along 24th street and it would be additional 95 trees in neighboring neighboring block and mission verde for a plan. >> with the 95, i know we'll do the block by block that would be applying to the removal of the block by block and the replacement and the additional 95 maybe it's different timeframe because it's replacing versus removing and replacing for those trees, correct? >> so good question, commissioner. so, we have made it clear the community that the additional 95 trees in the mission verde target areas, we will begin that work right away. we can do this in parallel. we are going to have contractors and tree crew doing work on 24th. we can be organizing and identifying so loosely, the community we've tried to come up with a time frame for the planting of the additional 95 trees and i'm spacing on that right now. i might have to verify. i think it was six months to a year but i might get a correct on that. >> i think it's fine. and then, with the watering plans with our community to the commitment and that sounds fine. >> it's a good fine. -- the watering plan which includes additional reviewing sights of the community and species for the side streets and with the ginko and red maple on mission treat and 24th street and then some efforts with the community to make wood available and perhaps the tremendous themselves available for art. does that encompass and the three months that it would be three months with the removal and replacement does that encompass the main points that i think you and mr. klipp worked with buff on. >> yes, you did a beautiful job of that. >> ok. all right. mr. klipp, is there anything that is missing from your hearing of that? we talked about being neighborhood and opportunity to say good-bye and it was something that we talked about with the bureau of urban forestry because these are just an important piece of this corridor. >> so i think mr. buck referenced that his comments as well so i is on his slide there. >> may i add something? >> yes. >> just if damaged or trees that are removed to be replaced within 50 days as the department had indicated, so we don't see (inaudible). >> ok. >> right down so i can -- >> sorry. >> it's good. ok, so, mrs. get ready. ok, so, i would move that we would grant the appeal and condition the permit on the following conditions -- that it would be for the removal of only 33 trees to be removed on 24th street replaced by 50 trees on 24th street and it will be maple and ginko variety of at least 24-inch box size on that street. there would be additional 95 trees planted within the vicinity of 24th street as illustrated in the mission verde plan presented today which is july 15th, 2020. that those rights of those trees and box sizes would be continuously worked out with the community as that goes forward. there would be a review of sites within the community with respect to the art as the trees are being replanted and to the mural that would, from the trees that are removed would be made available to the community for art or other activities and that the new trees that are planted, the tree stakes may be available for endeavors in collaboration with the community and that the trees that are removed on 24th street would be done so in a manner that the trees are removed and replaced within a three-month time period. if there are any damaged trees they would be replaced within two months if they're subject to vandalism and that would be for all 145 trees and that the community would work together to implement the watering plans as submitted in the mission verde plan submitted ton july 15th, 2020. i think that's it. >> on what basis? >> on the basis that this plan is accepted by both boss and the appellants. >> ok, so let me do my best to recap. we have a motion from commission tan tore issue the order on the condition that it be revised to require number one, with respect to 24th street, the removal of 33 trees with replacement of 50 trees those trees would be ginco and red maple in a minimum 24-inch size box and further, they will be replaced within throw months of removal and you wantedded me to add going block by block like they must complete one block andel radio move and replacement is block by block. they must remove the trees and the trump prior to going onto the next block. an additional 95 trees will be planted in the neighboring blocks as identified in the mission verde plan that was presented at the hearing today and the size and species will be determined by buff and the community and can you clarify, those are supposed to be replaced within six to 12 months of the hearing date? >> yes, that's correct. >> ok. and then, number three, buff, buff and the community will review the sites together and ensure that the murals are protected and four, on the condition that any wood from the trees that are removed is made available to the community. number five, the stakes that are used for the trees can be utilized by the community for art for the purposes of displaying and showcasing community art. and on the conditions that any damage trees be replaced within two months and on the condition that bus and the community work together to develop a water plan, a plan for watering these trees and i think that was the last condition. >> i realize i forgot one, the opportunity prior to the removal of the trees on 24th street for some type of farewell activity. obviously socially distanced and very safe to occur before the trees are removed. >> ok, so did you want to clarify who would be initiating this ceremony? >> it sounded like the mission verde group, i know it's not a group but it's a group now is maybe going to spearheading that initiative. i see kendra nodding perhaps? yes, is that your intention to work together on the farewell activities? >> i think we imagined it as in collaboration with calle 24. >> some of the groups would work together on that. >> yes. >> ok so prior to the trees being removed, there must be an opportunity for a ceremony or a recognition ceremony to say good-bye to the trees and this will be organized by mission verde and calle 24. this is on the basis that the plan was agreed to by buff and some of the appellants. ok, did i capture everything? >> that was amazing. i'm very impressed and the last thing i'll saying, it's not for the motion but if you are interested in the landmarking incident, we have someone on the line and we hope to see the project go forward and the application goes forward and it would be just a great time to move forward with that for the remaining trees. >> that's it. >> ok. >> i just want to move and i think the longest motion i've every experienced in my tenure. [laughter] >> you get a medal tonight. social medal for that. >> yeah. one for the books. >> hall of fame. >> ok, so, on that motion, commissioner santacana -- >> aye. >> president lazarus. >> aye. >> vice president honda. >> excellent motion but i'm still no. >> commissioner swig. >> aye. >> so that motion carries 4-1. thank you. and that concludes the hearing. >> thank you, very much. >> appreciate everybody's hard work. >> we are adjourned. >> thank you, everyone. >> >> thank you. >> good night. >> good night. good morningi know many of you have n tuning into the press conferences and reading releases for updates on covid in san francisco and status every opening. often those don't give us the chance to talk in depth about the complex issues we are facing. this is why talks like this today are so important. today i am joined by dr. grant colfax, director of department of public health to dive into one of the most complicated issues that we have focused on including information about the data. today dr. colfax and i are going to talk about the data the department of public health is tracking and what it means for san francisco in our ongoing response to covid. we know there are a lot of numbers out there. like the key health indicators available online and it can be difficult to keep track what it all means. i know at the end of the day everyone wants to understand exactly what this means and when will we open? this is so fundamental to the decisions we make forral of you every day. we want to explain it to make it easier to understand. the data shows where we have been in san francisco. it gives us insight into where we are going. it gives us the ability to change course if we see a concerning spike like recently. we had to pause the reopening activities and businesses as a result. with data we can model what the future might look like if we take action or don't take action. by makes decisions on data, science and fax, we will make decisions that slow the spread of the virus and save lives. we know that we are going to be living with cov

Related Keywords

Lemoore , California , United States , Brazil , Mexico City , Distrito Federal , Mexico , Hayes Valley , Calcutta , West Bengal , India , Spain , London , City Of , United Kingdom , San Francisco , Brazilians , Spanish , American , Mohammad Nuru , Daryl Honda , Cesar Chavez , Kevin Jensen , Julie Rosenberg , Leslie Freeman , Rachel Tanner , Sarah Benjamin , A Metin Anna , Christopher Campbell ,