top proprietor to spend money money on things that can't be funded private our infrastructure gets it last everyone else gets it but the arresting aborts get it last so i think the other thing we have to do is put the new trees in about wise in how it is set up we put the trees in on a drive we did them on another road many of the trees didn't survive the first time around they were not staked correctly when the winds came and i know that trees only need watering for a certain amount of time but they need it several years before they take root it will be efficient to have guys come bye

bye by in a truck it is false economy you put the water supply in there and never worry about the trees getting enough water on the subject of the foliage i know it's been brought up it isn't before us but the national area program didn't make sense we'll pub u talk about that the national from pictures i've seen one of which you should in our presentation is san francisco before the plantinging were done mostly sand it was not national and it didn't make sense to spend money on that this is great i'm going to move to initiate this and i believe we need a date i think we're

suggesting november 6th. >> second >> second. >> commissioner richards we're here today to initiate that and the discussion around the adaptation on november 6th we're not going to go through all the details here. >> cropping john what our initiating is the small amendment to the general plan not the adaptation of the plan we have one paragraph and in the general plan. >> i have a few comments i come from private industry we have reference to one billion dollars the transfer of the trees back to sprvrpz a train wreck ready to happen property owners don't want the responsibility they're

cutting trees back and cleaning them we need to do that before the asset goes away i will recommend there is some type of reaudit of the street trees a lot of trees have been killed i walk down the street and there are trees cut off in the middle i call and report them this is one of the most beautiful documents page 35 sets a standard open context every time would he ever have something like this we have a page 35 it helps to understand all the unrelated projects and there was albeit soup rfps i don't understand a couple of points i'm not sure about the natural patrolling plan we not talked about that and also about the

canopy so you gives a few insulins on the natural ordinance plan. >> i don't know all the specification but that is a plan produced by the rec and park department certain portion of their park areas for habitat restoration and special activities. >> i might add you'll be seeing the eir for that it's been underway for quite a while i don't know the exact date the eir for the natural plans project great. >> a couple of things doing the quick math a 25 percent tree canopy will be droubl the amount of trees we have 13.7 that's a heavy goal i think that starting small and building up is the way to go rather than becoming

overwhelming you start with 50 thousand it's great i'm also the first to advocate measuring i want to cut back on what we get if we plant a tree for every 20 feet how many trees over our 50 thousand goal i want to here over the 20 years but this is a really, really great second to initiate. >> commissioner hillis. >> i would agree with the last two commissioner comments i think the crux of this it's all great and great recommendations how to pay for it i agree what's i was trying to rely on the volunteer organizations or the nonprofits or the small city staff is clearly not working we're going to have the same

problems in the 50s with the street tree populations declining it's not working the only way to put the real funding towards it i would recommended beefing up the category i wouldn't give people hope that the foundations is going to make the impact the city has to take it on if it's going to work 81 we need a dedicated funding we know what had f that looks like do we have example see from other jurisdictions is it a a parcel tax or assessment how can we make this work i recommended you install some of the specification. >> that's a good question a good part of the work was at financial study we worked with e come that did an exploration of

how the other cities and the mechlgz that emerged were lighting and landscaping and parcel tax tied to our linear how big the situations are paying medical examiner's office and the bonds for the tree planting so. >> did you do what would a parcel tax for a 25 by one hundred typical parcel owner what do it look like. >> it is for a condo as low as $7 for street trees if you help with the are park maintenance it could be 20 so the majority of parcels 25 footwear under $100. >> so i think that's the way if we're going to be successful it

has to be like that a parcel tax or assessment it is reasonable and should be doable and i mean we have to getty people to move forward to do something like that how the street tree population it's decreased is it significant i may have missed it dpw were reducing i mean we're not keeping you e up we're not planting as many as were we losing. >> thanks carla short we have a 4 percent natural mortality from a tree that is declining due to old am to tree getting taken out

by a car accident the highest mortality is in the first few years we plant only a few hundred trees annually at public works and in inclination of the friends of the urban forestry we're not keeping won 94 percent more tablet and a modest growth of planting 29 hundred trees annually. >> in another jurisdiction what about situations there's is - is that $50 per parcel and the municipalities cover the sidewalks repair is the sidewalk damaged by itself tree you how does that workout generally.

>> the benefit of the you know some of the fivengs mechanisms especially the parcel tax covers the routine maintenance and the sidewalk repair and the legal trip and falls related to the trees i mean, we think the numbers it looks like the sidewalk repair can result in thousands of dollars of costs for the homeowner and in this case the suggestion they pay you know under a hundred dollars a year covered by a city program. >> all right. thank you thank you commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i'd like to follow-up with commissioner johnck's question a little bit more than more on the finance more of a comment like the report one thing i'll talk about on this item is i really like to see someone recommend opens o

options not only that rely on property owners there were a lot of things outlined pretty much that took the gambit of the options but recommended a feasible alternatives only are the lighting and person i depending on don't think those financing options once the population is engaged for all residents a parcel tax it may get passed on to them but not engaged in where their dollars goes we need the transbay joint powers authority or cash credits or other ways a citizen that doesn't own their property get involved in the 70 infrastructure and a comment i agree with the boarder eir in

the town of easier of the crisis in the document that is fantastic is not a huge forest i've talked about the southeast the marsh land that's not huge trees i definitely appreciate that and look forward to seeing the rest of the phases of the master plan. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> this is a lovely document and interesting to read we'll proudly hand out to anyone it capitulates the historic look at how we do thing and following up on the discussion about economics and phillips that's one this is interesting to have and the public weigh in to other questions i have are technical ones we have the streets which are flat with wide sidewalks and streets that are quite steep

with no sidewalks and the technical daily coming together with the fire department and sfmta and curve parking including the ada climate and the new considerations and create an overlay by which trees might be more recommendably than others that's a technical question we should think that about that it requires more money and larger coordination and probably other growth cycles an issue is the maintenance and combovrment enforcement many of the trees are planned by the friends of urban forestry fragile in the early years. >> parking of trucks and moving of trucks and larger cars don't paid attention to how to properly bring our car into the partially they hit the trees and

branches and damage them there should be enforcement in terms of clearance of trees etc. the one thing i'll like to see the document itself is not quite clear and consistently using the words forest plan trees and other vegetation i had to go to page 35 somewhere where it explains the impression and i had lots of people writing about the editorial comments we're not discussing that but it will make it clear thank you director ram and i said to clarify i think my

earlier comment was misleading you are navigate will adapting that by reference the idea correct me if i am wrong you'll adapt a statement in the general plan to adapt by reference effectively we were asking to initiate a hearing that will take place to allow you to adapt the reference i want to make sure i'm clear in my reference earlier >> thank you commissioner richards. >> this is about seniors there is one lady who is 99 she has a magnolia tree we clean up her sidewalk it gets several inches of thick of leaves how do we handle that when people can't

take care of off their front yards that i because the people didn't rake the sidewalks how do we handle that. >> i think the plan as envisioning the financing would cover the routine visits to the tree and long term tree care and management but the sweeping of the trees leaves are the responsibility of the people to keep their sidewalk clean we'll certainly have more people out on the street and there be addressing the issues but we don't have a mechanism to have someone sweeping. >> i think a good mechanism to inform what was going on the sweeping street sweeping concealed when the truck picks

up older items and say this is what parcel that hadn't been swept for months. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i agree with the fellow commissioners we need multiple funding for resources the one source is only take into account people that own property and the argument they'll be funding places where there are not preservation trees we want to encourage new areas to cast a wider net certainly like general obligations and sales tax is hard to do but that is a way to capture revenue and people my enjoy san francisco but not live here that's a couple ideas.

>> commissioner johnson. >> i'm sorry director are clarification we're 2340i6sh9d the amendment to adapt the amendment so this is the actual hearings to adapt the document; is that correct? >> yes. >> i don't know if i understand the question this isn't the approval it will be at the next hearing. >> i'm sorry, i thought i understood then he said i miss understand something i thought i got. >> maybe i can ask an additional question if you the commissioners have questions would you prefer the questions written in advance. >> yes. in advance. >> commissioners there's a we have a motion and a second adapt a recessing resolution of

intention to initiate and schedule a hearing on november 6th and duo to adapt the resolution has corrected on that motion marry commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong and commissioner president wu snoement unanimously 7 to zero. >> the commission will take a bre >> that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind please silence all electronic devices. during those procedures if you don't know anyhow to how to silence them turn them off case 20148 d at 333 pennsylvania

avenue request for conditional use authorization. >> a new planner joined the department in december of 2012 in the southeast quadrant a bachelor's from cal poly i didn't and international planning experience working with planning affirms and is has interest in sustainable systems and relocated here from hawaii welcome to the commission and. >> welcome. >> thank you, john for the intro good afternoon jeff spears department staff the item before you is a request for conditional use on pennsylvania after the proposed project to construct a new four story two family dwelling it has the height of 40 feet a set back and rear sent

even if approximately 33 feet and overall building depth of 49 feet during the public hearing two requests discretionary review and it is the department appropriated accident applicant to address the design comments the project applicant it is compliant the cladding and provided a dr request the change required by the department it do not to not trigger and renewing notice such the second story stare at the front and at the rear the stair the project represented in the 311 notification is the project before you today since october 2nd you received

the commission packet two letters of opposition from neighborhood on mississippi street and an additional exhibit on the dr number 2 that last been provided copies to you today turg the scanning the page two attachment b was mistakenly not included so the online versions of the report was corrected and i provide copies of that missing page the revisions provided provide a match light well of the adjacent property to the south and with distresses ants block with glaring doors and yelled e additional landscaping it is consistent with the character and scale of the neighborhood the department did not protect for private views views and the

department recommends the commission not to take dr this that concludes my presentation. and i'm available for questions. >> so first dr requester our team has 5 minutes. >> good afternoon and present members of the commission past pointing sound good, i have

several things to present to the excision i believe there is enough for everyone in not i've got a couple of more thank you and present members one of the things that's not brought up by the staff we introduced an objection to the 311 notice at least back in august august one and our august one supplement letter t is closed in our packet we raise the effect in the 311

notice we received after we received after the time the plans were filed and the notice was sent to us on april 2nd you know section 311 better than i do but let me read part of it that applies here on acceptance of any application subject to this the planning department shall review for compliance upon determinations that the application is in compliance with the planning code the planning department shall describe the proposed project to be sent in the matter described below i'm ref that the most frightening portion is that if i or any neighbor of mine didn't do anything in thirty days those

plans will obeying become fact and the construction precede there were at least 4 features of portion of portions of that notice that didn't comply with the planning code they were confirmed by the rdt team when they found that the proposed garage entrance didn't comply with the code and the full analysis was required later that summer on august 11th noiptd my letter i handed out to you it was described as senior staff of the department indicated that the 333 applicant of the notice

to the 333 filing of the original application not as complete or a compliant specifically in those plans there was no curb cut shown at all, in fact, the revised plans before you today, i still does not meet the planning code the curb cut is leveling not 10 feet required by the staff and planning code itself also in the original plans we pointed out in our dr and you've got the first page with part of our packet it we pointed out it doesn't have landscaping provided by the residential design guidelines the entrance was detect active in the plans and the garages

were not in compliance with the cod double door garages should have one and no curb cuts in the plans themselves so basically our jurisdictional complaint is that the notice was defective and jurisdictional defective and therefore it should be renoticed before anything further is done really the senior staff and the rdt team both determined that was no compliance i think it should be renoticed and the issue of jurisdiction you don't i don't particularly. >> thank you, sir your time is up. >> sir, your 5 minutes is up

you'll will have a two rebuttal at the end if you want. >> sir, your time is up. >> i can't tell you that - okay. >> okay. the other dr requester your team has 5 minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is shawn i'm a neighbor of the dr requester from 355 pennsylvania avenue his daughter has asked me to represent them today he is suffering from congestive heart

failure i'm going to read a letter into the record and leave a copy for the staff secretary dear planning commissioners i'm writing to express my concerns about the building on pennsylvania proposed for the vacant lot other 355 pennsylvania avenue it is still too tall and big dwarf my house and didn't step down the hill benign e like e like the other buildings on the block this building should be