city into a bunch of gray i didn't fields and most important the i pcc international climate change reports came out and the i pcc is saying what many of us are saying for the past decades the climate crisis with meth in the atmosphere is extremely dire we'll 80 got to rivera reserved it quickly to plant as many trees as quickly as possible and if this bad diversity crowd gets ahold of language other plants to be added to the document they could use it to help their causes of cutting down trees like the trees on mount davison with the clierment being as bad

we can't put-down a slippery slope we need to aggressively plant trees this is one of the worse city's i've ever seen for tree canopy it is terrible to allow scrub and brush to be considered part of trees is not going to serve the purpose of an urban landscape of defending our city from the climate warming so thank you >> thank you. next speaker. >> my name is jake i'm with the formal ad hoc group meeting over the years we deal with

problems of natural areas in the city your probably wondering what this has to do with trees we are very definitely in favor of street trees and increasing the numbers in the city but the draft plan here goes far beyond that it involves many things we sent you a letter yesterday, i hope you've had time to read it but chances are you haven't there are subsequential inconsistent sisters and problems we would like to see look at professor barking from the san francisco state university sent you a letter to

consider those so i would beg you to not adapt this for forward this to the general plan it's not ready for the general plan thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi my name is anastasia and i want to concur with several other is speakers like why was this goal set originally to increase the economy to 25 increased i mean moved away it is well, yeah - but i mean just the plan it will make

protection for park trees under attack i don't know how many have been removed since this monster problem happened years ago mesopeople are calling themselves environmentalists yet they cut the trees and eye herbicides and if you look again what the forest forever do they fight the lumbar companies which cut trees to use herbicides and the same things are used here in san francisco cutting trees and using herbicides so i just want i forgot completely what i was going to say but i'll add my voice the trees add back the overlay canopy because like the if the

street trees will increase by 50 thousand trees at the same time 80 thousand 4 hundred and 88 trees to be removed from the park how much gain is this and keep in mind 3 when trees are plant they're small trees for example, glen park will go away without cutting the huge trees one tree that was cut and we benefit it had probably would not displace it's oldest and i have to say this planting on the boulevard and i know 50 years it will be great and maybe in this year it will replace one or two of those trees their there's a lot of talk you cut redwood

trees and - we want it thank you. >> is there any additional public comment okay seen none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i'm in support of this i'll point out we're only talking about the street trees not the rest of the plan that is coming forward later on that maybe more of a challenge but so you would this is well planned, however, i have a few questions for staff first is we may have taken this up before it might not in the report but if street trees are on a residential street being planted is there permission needed by the are homeowner who's highway is adjacent to the position of the tree. >> are you asking if a neighboring homeowners needs to

approve their street trees planting paw no, i'm talking about if i own a house and the city wants to put a tree in there i'll have to scent to the tree being there. >> we'll ask the current homeowners. >> that's important because also the homeowner or whoever occupies the residential unit will have some say over the type of the tree and the size whether it's evergreen or whatever i assume. >> yes. that's currently how the friends of the urban forest do it. >> the friends or the city will do the maintenance. >> under a citywide street tree program. >> yes. >> it's a mixture of the staff and contractor assistance that could be the friends of the urban forest or some project contractors as well and a couple

of concerns everybody goes ballistic when you build something and there's a shadow that falls on anyone's house or park if it's a building the tree didn't matter nobody talks about trees i had a couple of big trees before they fell down and broke the house we get better light if a smaller tree so i think that it's important that this be done and also the maintenance is another thing that's important we saw kind of a comedic episode on places we put trees which you know often they didn't last they got blown down and not properly staked an odd way of warranties a truck

had to come and block the lanes so i hope this is done in a manner that's nor sensible that's another thing and people mentioned about the trees street trees are going to be trees not some sort of foliage that's not is that what we're talking about. >> that's correct not a plan to plant trees on the sidewalks wholly with other vegetation we're promoting a street tree will mram program but other programs that introduce difference types of ventilation that is landscaping many ways to say that but friends of the urban forest a planning department program that often takes place around a tree but involves small flowers we'll

consider that as part of the urban forest but not replace tree planting. >> but this sector we're voting on the street trees themselves as opposed to what they put on the lore level and the primary focus is stressing. >> they put this dried-up stuff it should be in the missouri hobo desert and they may save a lot of water but we have to look at it it i hope we're talking about trees it sounds good to me and we'll see with the other commissioners say but i'm supportive and have more discussion on the other parts of it. >> thank you commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much again really supportive of you'll the work i think we last praised the urban forest plan i'll echo that this time a

couple of things first, i want to echo something that was said and public comment today in the past letter will trees vs. other vegetation and personally i feel those comments stem from a little bit of a miss reading of what's here i'll ask the question but my interpretation the urban forest that includes trees and other vegetation and the tree canopy which is when you talk about the tree canopy of san francisco is 4.4 percent is trees i kind of can you verify that. >> i'll agree with you the tree canopy we're talking about trees and the canopy of trees that spreads over a city is holistic thing and derivative so i hope that helps some of the people the urban forest includes other

vegetation we need to consider other vegetation when we look at the totality of the green stuff in san francisco but the tree canopy is what the plans are about and the stressing are part of the tree canopy so i don't see any reason to adjust the language in the report it's pretty clear we're talking about trees as a canopy and the urban forest is everything else the next thing about financial mechanisms so this comment i made this comment last time i want to repeat it the way it works the report will be adapted as we're going to keep menus the report as part of the general plan and the report on financial mechanisms to report the street tree canopy and maintenance

thereof i see a lot of analysis around the mechanisms that reply on property owners for support you talked about parcel special districts bond or things like that that's the reup to that time comes from property owners and there's hadn't been as itch work done maybe worth mentioning not an analyzed on other mechanisms but looking at an additional savings or looking at additional fees that politically apply to those would live in san francisco but don't own property here i think the property based taxes are easier to implement but pile them on become unfair to property owners and are particularly to first time homeowners that buy a home and

radio burped with additional taxes and fees they never saw when residents but still share the amenities having the parks and trees easy things like that i don't know if that needs to effect this being adapted by reference but i want to see more work done i don't know if it needs to be taken place within the city and added but i want to see mechanisms that don't reply on property owners for repayment and and then again, i think there was some comment about dpw as maybe not having enough resources why we're relying on that the street tree program i agree with the finding the maintenance needs to be consolidate that program needs to be accommodated it's all over the place and dpw especially

they have the assets being the arresting bolsters and the trucks and the different materials to maintain the trees they're the place to house the maintenance program and they get enough resources monetary and legal in terms of restructuring the programs they'll be able to carry that out thank you commissioner richards. >> 3 points the first one is the funding aspect maybe this is a question for staff is it the normal process to have a plan and get funding or is it a mix. >> well, there's not within answer the situation oftentimes you create the plan and then you find the funding and implement it. >> as in this case. >> i guess the second one this is of interest this week the

urban forest master plan with the removal of the trees the subsequent master plan will be addressed some how this will be incorporated the cutting of the 18 thousand trees incorporated somehow. >> this focus is only on street trees this is a whole other host of issues to address the parks including - and i guess i was resolute but moving this forward quickly i have for a couple of weeks about the plan i think it's one of the most beautiful things i've read there was one that came around 9 o'clock and 6 o'clock yesterday afternoon a da shall very those were long

letters that were written by people i consider quality and they raised questions to me that actually made me more confused about what is the nuances of languages they offered suggestions and correction given the timeframe i had to read the letters i'm not i understand the impact of the nuances where i'm coming from where we have this process unfortunately, some have come in late and multiple process i hope that folks feel they're part of the process they took the time to write the letter although they came in late another couple of weeks with the holding the meetings to go over the concerns and to offer a point by point to

clarify this wouldn't hurt i'm respectfully ask we will get the other commissioner to evaluate those couple of letters and come and be clear where we're coming from so i'm more clear we'll vote yes on this tries me we will a couple more questions need to be answered for me. >> commissioner hillis. >> i'm supportive of this even though it's at same letters but others have made offer a good point of view we're fighting the battles coming later can you explain there's a natural areas plan eir how does that fit in with the next phases of this planning process? >> so there is a natural eir

from the rec and park department that affects what has been mentioned a lot of the tree he removal on the use of herb's that eir will be coming before i in the next year for approval and in terms of pursuing a parks plan some of the outcome from those decisions will feed into my kind of policy documents and but that's a separate kind of process that rec and park are taking as a natural plan. >> yeah. >> so, i mean i get meantime we bring up trees we start getting into those natural area for first trees i get it people are passionate on both sides it's clear we're tarnishing street trees and other vegetation nor the tree canopy citywide but this is about

street trees and i'm clear on that i think others two are but tend to want to model it into the issues of the natural plan i think this is a good document we should be focused on how to pay for it whatever do you're on that's part of the battle streets e natural areas we put in street trees to make them look for puff and function better but we should be arguing how when you've got good ideas we should be pursuing those the property kind of based tax you've quoted figures on the property tax so the trees benefit the property their adjacent to on the properties

along the streets i'm supportive and will move to you guess we're moving for adaptation; right? so i move for adaptation of planner. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> i believe excuse me. i believe that the comments made by commissioner richards are spot on we all embraced really the uniqueness and strength of the plan but the type of comments which were made and repeated by a number of people spoke clearly to some clarifications and corrections which i don't believe based on what's in front of us do i have been enroll under a taken at the top of the list is the inconsistent use of trees and other 0 vegetation he spoke about that last time i were needing that ambiguity for the

sake how it was argued today needs to be amended it is not what we understand with each other when i move into the general plan it becomes an unclear valuable wide open interpretation where the problems are so i urge you and urge the commission to pass the circulate and verbiage not anything to do with supporting that wholeheartedly this group has taken it where it is an award-winning place but the the devil is in the details and it is the devil is in the urban forest you plan it's a street plan not for brush or slush or whatever we need to have some slightly larger clarity open the management plan on the financial

sides as supported by the commissioners that supporting spoke collecting including the reinforcement reference something that's been worked on that alludes to other amenity we're further exploring by 0 moving this into the very hard to manage and environment we better be clear crystal clear we if have enough time for the adjustment other thing you might have done it i haven't seen the verbiage what is missing the clarification on ada and stressing you'll remind me speaking about that to both of you there was a further question own having that for a did you say discussion with the fire

department and canopy height one of the largest sacrifices with trees being made by truck drivers and u-haul trucks destroying the lower branches of newly planted trees our investment is 50 percent taken to zero because people don't know how to properly park their cars giving a shit i'm sorry i use this word i know live on an incline trees are continually being obey wrecked because a u-haul driver hits the tree and didn't brake when taking off half the tree this is including the management enforcement to be, affected i urge you to give a couple of

weeks to make minor tweaks to the verbiage you promised on october 9th and come forward and have it basically be a unanimous support piece. >> commissioner richards. >> sure the commissioner hillis point i'm not confusing the clear cutting of the eucalyptus trees with my asking for a couple of weeks this is addressed in phase two or three but the points raised by the professor geography stanford university we got last night i'm looking for a couple more weeks i wholeheartedly supported this plan a little bit of clean up work 82 you may not agree but come back and tell you why i don't agree i'll feel better and

i move to continue the item for two more weeks. >> second. >> tough calendar. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further there is a we have a motion and a second e e moved and seconded to adapt the matter and subsequent motion to continue to november 30th of this month the matter to continue takes precedence we'll take up that to november 30th commissioner antonini commissioner hillis no commissioner johnson no commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong no and commissioner president wu no that motion fails three to four

with commissioner hillis and commissioner johnson and commissioner fong and commissioner president wu voting against and i want to bring up the commissioners brought up letters and requests for further clarification this is not the end the process it needs to go to the board of supervisors i think there is time for further outreach i'm not saying let's not get answers he agree with commissioner johnck we should be focused on the fund that is the heart of what gets us more trees commissioner antonini and yeah. i'd like to with agreement with the maker of the motion i think it w it was commissioner hillis and commissioner fong but the street trees are, in fact, to be trees and eliminate the verbiage of

the other fondle it didn't mean we couldn't be landscaping on the medium but talking about pitting trees as part of the street tree program so if that's all right. with the secretary that's the classification i'd like to see in writing. >> i mean, the only issue i went through the merits and tried to identify some places it refers to trees. >> u but it's referring broadly to trees so it's right but it's clear when it receives to street trees it if say increase street trees and vegetation by 50 percent by street trees i don't know unless you have specific and then it's fairly clear what we're talking about people can point out specification i don't mind going through this where the language is not clear and

classify it and not remove other vegetation that and makes sense. >> maybe more of a finding we're the commission made - and in the interim work with some of the comments and that's to classify the street trees and you know where street trees are mentioned but the intent of the plan is not to say you can take adopt a street tree and replace that with other slush. >> that's okay with me. >> commissioner moore. >> if the 1 time the street tree accompanies there's a footnote explaining i'll support the motion icing otherwise we're

failing to look at the responsibility to forward it to another is not enough this commission has more time than the board of supervisors it's our responsibility to do the best we can to fully understand the issues which are brought in front of us and deliberately on them i believe in the ininconsistentcy of the language to resolve the issues the letters we got throughout the entire document inthat consistency of the page that's quite a long letter as you read through the document it says at the beginning point asterisk i'll building comfortable with the language but it has to be clear what you