think we mean to put you through a big process here. just like he showed us those examples for sherman's war, our fear is that the next person on clement street -- this starts to bite away at sidewalks all over the city. we have to do our due diligence and see if this is the best solution. >> ok. president garcia: and it seems like there was some issue about miss levy did not feel something had been given to her? if we could solve that in may? >> i did not realize i had to submit a brief two weeks ahead of time instead of one week. i apologize. >> would you want additional briefing them? commissioner fung: i think we would want to see the proposal. >> i suggest the permit holder's brief would be due two thursday's prior. that means your brief would be due april 26.

the appellant and the department's response would be due one thursday prior, which is may 3. president garcia: i think it would be as simple as calling the board, if it turned out you needed extra time. >> i want to make it clear to everyone involved in this case that you also need to provide copies of your material to other parties at the same time provide them to the board. >> thank you. >> we need a motion. commissioner fung: i am going to move to continue this case to may 9. >> with the additional briefing as described. >> on that motion -- and again, it is to allow time for the permit holder to pursue other proposals. president garcia: aue/ -- aye. commissioner hillis: aye. commissioner hurtado: aye.

>> the boat is -- vote is 4-0. >> ribble colorado item 6, reuter versus the department of public -- we will call item 6, roy versus the department of public works, appealing the denial of a permit to remove and replace two trees. we will start with the appellant. you have seven minutes. >> i wanted to make a request to change the order slightly. we had clearly mistakenly had the impression we would be on the agenda earlier, and i have two neighbors who had the good news to appear in support of my appeal. one has already had to leave because of time constraints. the other has to leave by 6:30. i wonder if you would allow him

to make a couple of his comments first, and then have me do my spiels? president garcia: i do not think anybody up here will object to that. >> how much time for public comment? president garcia: give this gentleman three minutes. how many people intend to speak on this item? >> there are three people. there is a remaining neighbor, my partner who lives in the house with me, and an arbor is to did an evaluation. >> your partner and your arborist need to share your time. president garcia: we will let the gentleman who has to leave -- they can have three minutes.

>> i am a neighbor who lives across the street. from my point of view, the two trees -- steven horowitz, at 122 eugenia. from my vantage point, these trees are a nuisance. they are constantly being hit by truck traffic that comes up the street to avoid the mission and cortland light. the branches are constantly being knocked on the ground. the seed pods are quite treacherous. it is almost like a ball bearing. the sap that comes out of the tree when it blooms could be bottled as monkey blue. it is that sticky and pervasive. other than that, the trees themselves do not lend anything to the neighborhood. i understand the request was to replace them with two other types of trees that i hope would

be less invasive. that is about all i have to say. >> thank you. miss roy? >> i am beth roy. i have lived at 270 prospect for almost 20 years. it is a corner house. the trees at issue are the side street. there is parking on one side, not the side where the trees are, but the other side. i want to take one of the precious minutes to thank ms. goldstein for working with us on getting us here today. we were rescheduled for the later time and this date landed right in the week when we were expecting a grandbaby. there was a possibility we were not want to make it, but he appeared at about 4:00 this morning. we are here. we may not be coherent. we did not get much sleep last night. but here we are.

there are two issues about these trees. one is about the health of the trees. the other is about their appropriateness for the site and for the neighborhood. steve horwitz has already spoken to the issue of the appropriateness. the neighbor who had to leave also left notes and asked me to talk about how treacherous the footing is when the seed pods fall, which is pretty much constant. we are out there sweeping them up year round. i will say some more about the appropriateness, and let my partner and my arborist also say more about that. in terms of the viability of the trees, there has been a debate about that. the person who has cared for these trees over a number of years has been alerting me that there are overhanging branches that have been hit by trucks constantly, over time.

the street is so narrow that there is no place for the trucks to go except right up against the curb. even when there are no mishaps, they tend to wack those trees. they have been pruned underneath in a way that makes for clearance, but it is not sufficient. in addition, the little seed pods cause a good deal of skidding. we have had trucks hitting the trunks of the trees. i know that carl schurz -- carla shortz does believe the trees are viable. i am sure she will tell you that. there has been a disagreement about that. i want to start by saying that on sunday, in the midst of the wind storm, this is a photograph taken by a neighbor in our absence sunday afternoon.

the tree that was less at issue -- if you can see the bridge hanging down, the issue has been large looms that hang over the street. when they come down, but are a hazard to anything passing by, vehicular or pedestrian. this is the one that was the last their midst lamb. there is also a question on the larger and the work tree, which could show in the photographs you have already seen in your pockets. that limb is even more damage, more likely to come down. there is more question about the viability of the tree once it does, because of the balance on that slope. we do have issues about the health of the tree. even if we did not, there is this issue about their appropriateness on this very, very narrow street with a very

narrow sidewalk. they impede progress both of vehicles and pedestrians. it is very actively used by both, for his series of reasons. i will seedtime to my partner -- cede time to my partner. i will leave this up. >> good evening. i live at 270 prospect ave. i think all i have to say here is that as someone with an increasing visibility of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, navigating the sidewalk beside my own house is really hard. it is almost impossible for anybody with any kind of disability aid to get up and down the street safely with

these kinds of trees. my father was a forester. i was raised with a reverence for the green. we are not interested in not having trees in san francisco. we intend to replace them with more appropriate trees for this site. the are not the trees that should have been there in the first place. i really ask you to take our appeal. i am not the only disabled person trying to get up and down this hill. we are the main thoroughfare for commission and part up to burn oil. -- for mission and bart up to bernal. i have seen people fall on those sidewalks. no matter how vigilantly we sweep them. we are not asking to remove the trees in front of the house, where there is more room and street parking so that trucks do not hit the branches. thank you.

i am sorry. i brought a card. >> my name is roy, and i am a consulting arborist. beth roy asked me to evaluate these trees. there are a couple of points i want to add to what they have already told you. the canopies of these trees are a regular. there are gaps or openings within the structure. the problem with that is the wood is very brittle and limb failures like they've just experienced are common when you have breeches in the can of the for this type of tree. -- breaches in the canopy for this type of tree. the wind gets in there. because of the irregularities from prior storms, and partly

because of clearance problems where limbs have been damaged and have come out of the tree -- out of both of the trees -- i think those kind of canopy or structural changes in the tree have created a bigger problem, in terms of hazards. the amount and type of debris that comes out of these trees is extreme. the pods are over an inch in diameter. they are very treacherous, even on level ground. i do have some sympathy towards them. thank you. president garcia: i am assuming the sympathy is for your clients and not the trees. >> i am an arborist. but i certainly have some sympathy for my clients. i did have a vague hope they would name their grandchildren after me, but that would be roy

roy, so that would not work. >> the grandchild's name is audie irving roy. >> par la -- carla short, bureau of urban forestry. first, congratulations on your grandchild. i do not think i have too much to address. i would love to claim we were recommending removal was the one that failed. that may be true, but i do not know if it is. we did note that one lamb had a crack. that was the one we were recommending removing. trees to require maintenance. these trees do shed pods. we do not dispute that. that also do provide traffic calming. in particular, if there have been trucks that have run into the trunks of trees in the past, i would rather have them hit a

large tree then my house, and the smaller trees would not stop a truck. it is important to recognize that there are irregularities in the canopy. that was likely caused by past pruning practices, which i understand was probably to get clearance for the solar panels. we certainly support having solar panels, but it needs to be recognized that in proper pruning probably contributed to some of the issues the trees may be experiencing now, including someone failure. i thought a really elegant solution would be to have landscaping adjacent to existing trees, which would contain some of the seedpods. it might make sweeping them up easier, to have a water basin. we would like to see these trees preserved. the have been in the ground at least 16 years. they of substantial trunk diameter.

and i think that while the past pruning has contributed to some structural issues, i think it is fair to characterize that the trees are healthy. if they are pruned carefully, it could help mitigate some of the concerns. i think that is all i have. commissioner hillis: are there a lot of these trees in this neighborhood or elsewhere in san francisco? >> there are. they are not the most common species, but certainly do have a fair number in san francisco. commissioner hillis: do you recommend them for future clintons? >> we generally do not recommend them as street trees. it is a species i personally like a lot. we recommend planting them in places where there might be room for a larger tree basin. we have planted them in medians. the larger space can address the

seedpod issue. also, they do get substantial in size and give a little more room for the trunk. commissioner fung: who planted these trees? >> there were planted with the permit 15 years ago. it was by the planning commissioner. i assume it was mrs. roy. we have a permit record for them in '97. apparently, we do not have a good record of who planted them. my record conflict with the property owners. commissioner fung: these are fast growers. >> they are. president garcia: thank you. do these trees produce and shed not all year long? or is that a winter thing? >> i am sure the probably shed. it is usually a seasonal thing. we would say twice a year they would shed, and not necessarily

all year long. but i would not dispute they may have dropped pods at other times. they do not necessarily shed all their pods. they might fall later on. president garcia: i think the worst thing about the trucks -- maybe some of hit the trunk, but i think it mostly has to do with a limb problem. >> i would say those lines are not substantially damaged. that is probably because they have made an effort to clear them. the damage we saw was not substantial. but i may have misunderstood that also trucks had hit trees down the block. if i am wrong about that, i stand corrected. president garcia: i know you are bureau of forestry, not really dpw. it seems aside from these other problems, this should be a no truck street. >> i would agree with that, because also it is a t. it does not seem like a logical truck route.

i would go up portland. straight shot. very few stops all the way. i do not live there. president garcia: we do not have the commissioner -- we used to ask this question all the time. i asked it on behalf of commissioner goh. how old is the tree and what is its life span? >> i will attempt to dodge the question, as i frequently did. i thought the trees were 16 years old, which would not surprise me, given their size, since that are fast-growing. they may be much older than that. at the same time, a 16-year-old tree of the species could achieve that. life span is difficult to predict in urban conditions. these trees are native to australia and endangered in their natural habitat. many in australia are excited that san francisco has a population.

i think they probably get removed before the end of their life most frequently in san francisco. we do not know how long they could live here if they were able to live out their natural life span. >> is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, we have rebuttal. >> just one thing i wanted to point out is that bernal heights has a certain reputation for contention. we have a stack of supporting letters about this issue. everybody living up and down eugenia has been grateful to us that we have initiated this process. to my knowledge, there have been no letters submitted protesting this. for what that is worth. it is a unanimous neighborhood project at this point.

i do not know that there is anything else to add. one thing i would say about the truck route question is that roy explained as an ex trevor is a no-stop route. -- ex-truck-driver is that it is a no-stop route without a stop sign. i think that is the reason we get so many trucks. i had never understood it before. but there is something about the traffic pattern. we love the suggestion that it should be made in no-truck route. commissioner hillis: how long have you lived there? >> since 94. the trees were there. it is part of what i love about this house. it is a cottage. it sits on the corner. it has old-growth trees. it has a huge palm tree in the front. talk about an inappropriate street tree, but it is

beautiful. i love the tree. there is another flower in the wrong -- flowering gum on the prospect side of the property. i think that are beautiful trees. i have initiated this with some regret. i would prefer to have sizable trees on that side, and would certainly replant with the largest trees possible, but trees that can sustain a canopy that really works. the issue of the solar panels, it is true that there is an issue about keeping the trees pruned for the functionality of the solar panels, but when i put the panels in, actually made a decision to do it even though they would work at less than full efficiency because the trees were there. i did not intend to remove the trees, nor to groom them in a way that was going to do damage. if that happened, it has not been with my knowledge.

i am learning that for the first time. commissioner hillis: the trees across the street are the same species? >> yes, but there are cars parked under them, so there is a little more protection. it is also a wider sidewalks. both. there is one of these trees across the street on the virginia, and the tree in front of my house on prospect. i told the neighbor who had to leave -- there was a decision made within the neighborhood to plant a cluster of them, back at least 25, 30 years ago. that is my understanding. president garcia: thank you. >> ms. short? any rebuttal? commissioners, the matter is submitted.

commissioner fung: and anecdotal, -- i remember prospect street without many trees 50 years ago. i might as well give my opinion. i think that this species, besides my normal discussion in terms of the rights of owners to be able to replant in front of their homes, since they bear the responsibility for street trees in front of their house -- i would add, besides that, that in this particular location, given the narrowness of the sidewalk and the street, the trees really

need to be -- it cannot be full canopy trees without creating a lot of impact and disturbances. i support overturning the department. however, we will see where that goes. commissioner hurtado: in the interest of full disclosure, i am familiar with that area, and had the unfortunate experience with these types of knots, where you can slip very easily. i have in fact had that experience. i can sympathize with that concern, particularly with your partner having to navigate that just to get out of the house. so i would support removing the trees, particularly because i see your concern about the trees and about replanting.

to me, and that is personal and you have the right to do that. commissioner hillis: i think i normally would be against -- i would be for dpw in allowing these trees to remain. i am like you. i would not want to cut down a tree. they seem like nice trees. they add to the canopy with the trees across the street. it is great. i think it is wonderful. but i think your testimony is compelling, and the fact that your dad was a forester. i think you share the same sentiment that you would not normally want to cut down these trees. i value that. you live there, and i think you have made a compelling case. so i would support that also, although not normally in the case. president garcia: thanks, guys. i think we are at this stage of

negotiation. we have to have a discussion with ms. short as to what size tree she would choose to have them replaced these trees with, because i intend to vote with my fellow commissioners. >> a thank you for the opportunity to weigh in, since it looks like this is a losing battle, so to speak. i think, given the narrowness of the sidewalk, it is probably unrealistic to get anything larger than a 36 inch box tree. if the property owner is really willing to do some type of landscaping, there is no parking on this side of the street. the can maximize sidewalk when escaping. we would love to see 36 inch box trees go in there, if that is possible. but it is a steep street. that would potentially be a bigger challenge than normal.

a 24 inch box would also work. if they are willing to go for 36, i think that seems very reasonable. president garcia: could we get 324's - -three 24's in? >> depending on the species, we might. if the species was more columnar, there might not be a conflict between the canopies. it would be a little tight, possibly, but we could probably do it. president garcia: would a reasonable way to leave this be to have you agree that someone would measure if two 36's fit or three 24's? when the decision be yours, assuming the owners would go for either of those options?

>> that sounds like a nice compromise. commissioner fung: most columnar trees are fast growers. >> true. i meant there would not the competition. we could get them on in there -- commissioner fung: i understand. president garcia: i have no objection. >> the consulting arborist. i am only here to contribute on a technical level for the replanting. we are prepared to do sidewalk landscaping. that is consistent with the property owner's desire. the 24 inch box i think would be more practical because of the cross slope, the steepness of that street. the soil rootball within the container has a level surface to it. we do not want to bury that down in order to create conformity to

the cross slope. it would be harmful to the health of the tree. i would recommend that we go to a 24 inch box size, from a more practical standpoint. president garcia: do you think you could get three of those? >> i am certain two would fit. i am not certain about three. but i think if we had a smaller species -- i am not sure which species we would end up with. with a smaller species, there would be room for closer spacing. president garcia: i am going to assume that you are willing to assume that ms. short will be as reasonable as she always is. >> ms. short is always reasonable. we are happy to work with her again. president garcia: we believe those options open and as other commissioners have a different thought. commissioner fung: do you want to hear from the property owners? president garcia: i