at 18 lansing, 81 lansing, 50 lansing, 66-56 lansing and 3/91 street. approximate 21 trees are proposed for replacement that the plan here is that the project sponsor of 45 lansing would remove these trees, replace them, and then be responsible for the maintenance of these trees. they are currently either be maintained. the reason for move on the application is that the street is a very narrow sidewalk this can become a shared street. so, the sidewalk and street level will all be at the same level, the same grade. the trees will not withstand that level of grade change so the approval was granted by the department to approve the trees the mac really, tonight were not talking about the removal. the appellant is really speak about how many replacement trees can be fit into the right-of-way adjacent to the property. i will show a couple of diagrams to explain some of the site constraints. if we get your the overhead. so, a

total of seven street trees, and they are fronting 18 lansing are proved for removal with replacement of three trees. the reason for that is because there is going -- the sidewalk is whining. the trees are actually going to be placed in the road, as small sort of build outs within the street. so they need wider spacing for the parking stalls. is also existing driveways. across the street will be the removal six street trees with replacement of seven street trees. a real key sticking point for the appellant is that their unit is located right about here. so, they are losing a close street easier with a replacement and then directly cross the street is where the streetlight is located. so, this is kind of the immediate area of concern here for this evening. in the

last few days we have been in touch with the appellant to see if we can get to middleground. there are number parties working together rainout soap weekend meet the needs of a pounds. three sticking points of the appellant: one is the desire to replace the trees in this area of the block. then evergreen species and it sounds like both the project sponsor and planning are open to that. so that is one positive. the other issue is to try to add a tree right here, directly adjacent to the property, and there is constraints against that related to the fact that a majority of residents in a building, from what i am told, preferred to have additional parking lot spot and not an additional treat out. the third item is to try to wedge to more trees directly across from the gas station in this location where a new street

light will be located mac a challenge for public works is that we have to follow planting guidelines. we do not want to gain up to many trees on a tight little spot and create public safety concerns in the future. this part of -- street plan and in general, we want to trees out there a widely. the challenge for us from the department's perspective, is we want to help -- were all pro-tree this commission understands that that we want from and as many trees as possible, we have to do that in a reasonable measured approach. so, were not comfortable doing is having trees being too close to that streetlight and i think where we are this evening is close to maybe i will try to get to that point. i think it will be important here to hear from a colleague with planning, and again the project sponsor and how we got to this point and see if we can get the replacement tree issue hammered out. thank you.

>> commissioner i have a few questions. on the replacement trees, what is the canopy can i look like at full-grown in comparison to what is there now and what is planned to be there direct the other question says were removing this many trees is there other areas on that development that they can replace those other trees added? >> testifier: the current replacement plan has gone up from when we issued the decision out of the departmental tree hearing, we said 21 pleasantries with a little bit of a disclaimer that there is -- on exact number at the moment, the proposal is for 24 replacement trees mac divided up up from 24 to 27 victims were the canopy would look like, without a doubt, it is going to be a large impact to that end of the street. ivan image here showing 18 lansing

on the left and the rove street trees on the right. i hate to try to create a timeline, but it can take many years to re-create a canopy with an appreciable spread to it. it is really difficult to do that. one way to do that is to cram the trees in there to try to create screening and privacy from the gas station. but again, we have to try to follow our minimum spacing guidelines. what was the other part of the question? >> commissioner: is there any part of the lot they can put trees onto? >> testifier: exactly. based on what we have seen there is room for a total of 24 new street trees on the block. there just is not more room for additional trees along lansing on either side of the street. the first street frontage is not part of their property. >> commissioner: is there an

absolute minimum that the department is going to take because what has happened in the past is developers say that were going to put 12 trees back in and they say i am sorry. our water could not have it and are cable could have it and win with five trees. >> testifier: correct:. that plans to remove 27 and 24 is then reasonable it has been studied quite a bit from a lot of folks from planning. so, i think 24 replacement trees total on the block is very accurate, and i think the plan, as proposed although there are large gaps in the canopy, and that is unfortunate at the moment it seems like that is the best we can do. >> commissioner: with respect to working space vs. trees, you said you were told the neighbors would prefer parking spaces? what did you mean you

were told? >> testifier: yes matt in the work in the hearing at public works is quite a bit of public testimony and public -- since that hearing both the project sponsor and planning representative met with many constituents on a block. some people want to see fewer bike racks and more driveways. so they had to be without a lot of different constituents. in the end, it seem like this one particular issue still remains. but i think the challenge is that -- excuse me -- in conversation the last several weeks planning and the project sponsor have told me that, in those outreach efforts that

they have had to try to find out, what do folks want to see here in front of 18 lansing and are majority of folks -- may be a simple majority, who are saying, but, we rather have the next two loading than additional treat their mac that feedback i received from them back measured is it the folks whose least affected by the move removal of the trees? >> testifier: exactly ensure they are correct if their unit was directly facing the street they would feel differently. >> commissioner you are an opportunity in public comment >> testifier: yes >> commissioner: i we can hear from planning separately? >> clerk: if the board has questions or desire do it certainly within your purview to call planning up. >> commissioner if you like to elaborate, come forward. >> testifier: thanks for having me on paul -- in the planning department that i did work on this project for a couple years now.: speak

briefly about the outreach we did to the neighborhood. so, we went to the neighborhood in december of 2013, the local neighborhood. does it to you removal hearing on gender 22nd of this year, and a bunch of neighbors came out had an informal talk about her feelings met in the hallway about an hour afterwards it after the hearing commissioner has this to go back to the neighborhood map we went out and met with the neighbors 18 lansing specifically on this issue. to zoom in on the overhead there is these red areas are driveways. then, this space you can see this pattern with the trees [inaudible] we were able to get the dry weight pattern on the other side of intime lansing was challenging to fit a bunch of trees in their. there were some residents at this meeting the

mac we went out with tape measures and walk through these issues -- how to get access in the drivers and determined we could probably squeeze in another tree here that probably some residents who wanted to unit of the other one a parking space specifically about in space because there is not a lot of loading on the street met the concern moving in and out would be a challenge. so, we put it back to the residence and asked them to confirm amongst themselves and come up with some -- we said were happy directory or loading we want to make sure that you need to guide this on our decision the residence up. observes that we want a parking space your. so, we then went and had a third meet with the residence on the 25th two sort of can for about 25 or the people that showed up at the meeting at the enemy would present the plan and asked if there was consensus there was one person in the room that said about parking removal that universally everyone has endorsed the plan. after that mr. -- vadim oss was not able

to attend the meeting was upset. whole building expressed consensus on this issue. we are willing to consider moving to an evergreen tree and were willing to consider removing a parking space and replacing it with a new tree, but yesterday the building on board because of the weight otherwise it invalidates the whole process. he went to the board in the neighborhood we affirm their desire to maintain a parking space. and sort of were split 50-50 on evergreen which was something we can explore evergreen trees. i also want to point out across the road where the gas station is, one of things we heard our first meeting the people were upset about light pollution from the gas station mac because of all the constraints to the driveways over here on the lansing side of the street were unable to fit as many trees as we wanted to but we also spoke with a pattern try to squeeze

as many days as we could from the gas station to mitigate the light pollution. there will be at least three trees currently right now there is a driveway with the destination is and were able to sort of -- you can see the cars parked in front of it. we can especially try to respond as best we can do the design to modify the designs from what we heard from the neighbors. as to the other streetlights [inaudible] i think both planning the developer up the works are open to these conversations. we cannot promise that we can [inaudible]early feedback. so,

the expectation the likely hood of the gas vision of the way we spoke to the designer. from that project and assure them the design and they were operable with it that we do not have a guarantee that is going to happen because the development -- things all part but our expectation is the destination's county gun probably interferes. >> commissioner: just as it says right here with a canopy

of large evergreens going, not only is it going to be late in but this can be a tremendous more noise pollution. that does not get filtered. i dove the residents are aware that. tested we did not talk about that. >> commissioner: a couple questions. who made the decision on the deciduous? >> testifier: cell >> commissioner is that from planning? >> testifier: [inaudible] the area plan i think in -- in early 2005 it predates my time at the planning department the area plan has working up with some basic concepts on the street and then cycle fuzzies out or write a -- so the area plan [inaudible] robust public process around this planning effort in the dose plan it goes into details about [inaudible]

this is the maple that they are proposing to developers put in the plan megan also gets into paving materials and so forth. so the design that the developer have come up with was -- sort of our concept diagram that we actually created in this document.. >> commissioner: did you look at if you shifted those lights one day ammo would that have done anything to resolve some of these questions? >> testifier: i actually have -- maybe they are better to answer the question once you start moving lights around you get into other technical codes about photo metrics which are not my area of expertise >> commissioner [inaudible] has a good 20 feet apart so you can

see -- >> commissioner you can see the same pattern. their alternate touch it whether it starts on the first day vs. the second eight, is dependent upon the design. >> testifier: i understand your question is not much shifting the whole bites for the one-day fact [inaudible] >> commissioner: it would be interesting to see because you have aggregated some trees, which provide some shielding done, visual shielding on one of the areas, but you left the other one totally empty. i am just wondering if there is some -- some satisfaction for all the parties? >> testifier: possibly. the one positive concern that i have is, if you shift the lights over by -- you may be

impacting other residents with the same issue down the block. so, not sure with the impacts of that are. >> commissioner: i am just raising as an alternative. >> testifier: sure. is a possibility. >> clerk: thank you. should we hear from the permit holders now ? >> testifier: adam -- with it went to big robust process that big of a certain conceptual guidelines to follow. as part of our project we said will be happy to implement cutting-edge curve the street plan which is very high immaterial and we agreed to maintain the street. the hard skate and soft scape in perpetuity because we thought it was also exciting business for the neighborhood back the question here, all the neighbors including the appellant are okay with the

removal of trees and replacing of the trees met the question is the species in the deciduous or evergreen will kind of evergreen and will kind of deciduous and we try to create, with planning and dpw, the largest dumbbell as possible to make the most amount of people happy. we have had dozens of community hearings and meetings in meeting in small groups with all the residents matt. this is a plan that most people were okay with keeping all the deciduous police that were happy to do whatever one wants to do and will try to make as many will find refinements as possible back with the appellant were happy to change to evergreens that were happy to look at adding to trees. is all very high and expensive trees, whether deciduous maple in which a very large 35 foot tree as opposed to the 15 foot -- which are there now. some people wanted the changing of the foliage and seen the leaves change the mac evergreens have certain toxins. there is no

perfect tree here go try to find the tree was people are happy with and we said we can do deciduous or evergreen. here it seems like most people would be okay with the evergreen and were trying to read too much raise at own expense, but there is a question about how closer to me to the streetlight. without agreed to change the streetlights from an overhead name to downward facing right so there is no light pollution from that. we have been speaking with the -- four a while now and he seems to to speak to it but agreed to withdraw the appeal if were able to implement the changes to get evergreens make the trees closer to the light to have lot that. so, were just going to the details now. it is getting to conceptually, on the same page. which is about implementing that technical specifications proud father tree can print from the streetlight and the amount of the foliage and that kind of stuff that i think we have a plan for. we just did not have time to get all of the various

agencies -- for today >> commissioner: it looks like you provided street cover screening for one of the units by providing three trees across that there is no light there. the appellants, there is a light there and then there is no tree screen in either in front of his unit or the opposite side. i do not hope that works in a fair manner? by the way you have a [inaudible] >> testifier: i do, small city. the light there were putting into that 10 feet tall is below his unit and downward facing that there is no light pollution from that destination which is the concern >> commissioner: the issue is whether you can plant trees [inaudible] >> testifier: right. were looking at how close we can get

them. because of new trees are very -- such high-quality, bigger more robust rate whether other green were deciduous, will provide more shielding from the gas station. we arty agreed to bug my more mature expensive trees others less so like time when they are fully grown. were really trying to do everything we can to make as many people happy is possible, and there is a -- one person who has some concerns and would china work through it. i think we have a passport but >> commissioner: welcome to our world. >> commissioner: let me repeat what i just said. it does matter who it is, there is a driveway that goes so no tree can be planted there. opposite the unit you planted trees there. there is no [inaudible] you put unloading zone in front of another person. there is no tree there. there is a light

right across mac i do not think that is a raise their process you have. >> testifier: again will be happy to put it tree that but most of the neighbors and that building did not want to trader matt. we look at moving a tree in front of this and we are making unloading zone swapping between tree unloading zone but did not comply with the fire could because the fire trucks need to get through. so, -- >> commissioner: [inaudible] >> testifier: we are happy to put a tree in front of but the rest of his neighbors work the same issue. i think some of those residents are here and they can speak to that as well. >> commissioner: what is the replacement box size of the replacing trees to it >> testifier: were buying 24 inch boxes. >> commissioner: >> testifier: 48 sorry

>> commissioner 24 did not sound like very adult but 40 is bigger. >> testifier: these are 40 foot trees. bazillion is very small. >> commissioner: then, you have got over the plans and you are pretty confident you can put in at least 24 trees because i am sure you heard me say we have developers recommend [inaudible] >> testifier: is a hodgepodge of trees like little skinny trees against the building middle of the sidewalk and we are replacing a lot of the low-quality psalteries with high-end really robust high-quality treat >> commissioner: the maple is a very attractive trait that is my fellow commissioner mentioned not only are you getting at light pollution. and it was pollution as well in comparison to the adjacent one, which is the three trees and a light. so there is heavy saccade of trade needed a guy with a tree gets the light and the guy -- >> testifier: thank you.

>> clerk: we can take public comment has initial plans me people plan to speak on this item? okay. when you step for. step forward tested my name is geraldine farrar also resin of 18 lansing street. i been in the building for nine years. >> testifier: the puck in front of our building as opposed to trees. as you can see, from the other pictures, our street is really narrow. are building we do not have any loading zone. so, this is what you see. on a daily basis. rainout about driver at the guest vision with the fedex drivers and of jump the sidewalk in or to make

deliveries on our street. were to our building. if they do not do that they block the entire street. guy lansing is a one-way street. so, not only are they can affect our building it is going to affect the neighborhood of. as far as putting a tree instead of a loading parking lot in front of our entryway. also, the current trees now are actually sick. we look forward to getting them replaced. is some sort of trees. i do support the final streetscape plan. that we were very collaborative with a 45 lansing group. they heard our concerns and the concerns were mainly about 12 parking street street parking on guy lansing. and also, maximizing the trees. the issue is, the trees on the sidewalk right now. the sidewalk has to be ada compliant, so that is why they have to be out on the street. therefore, we lose street parking. that is why we were

support for the final streetscape plan and also the tree removal and. thank you. >> commissioner i have a question: in the picture does your unit overlook lansing street? >> testifier: that is my unit i took the picture from a unit. >> commissioner: overhead, please. so, right now there is no trees in front of your unit rainout correct? >> testifier: right >> commissioner thank you. cook it next public comment. >> clerk: next public comment. >> testifier: my name is cliff low. on the landscape architect on the project. >> commissioner are you a paid

consultant? >> commissioner you can speak under their time than. >> clerk: any other member of the public that would like to speak? seeing none,, will move into the rebuttal start with the talent. you have 3 min. >> testifier: i have a few more pictures to show. first, i am going to think mr. fung would tick for being of the issue of -- this is exactly how i felt. you know i know we got really far into the process. i tried to contact the association from the [inaudible] i spoke to the

developer mac expo to my neighbors had tried to explain that there should be a more fair choice for everyone. right now i have a screen in front of one window. i would like at least part of it. i been told it has been too late so that is where we got so far in the process. i also wanted to thank mr. honda for bringing up the issue about light and noise pollution. coincidentally, i will try to make it happen -- coincidentally, i have a video that was taken on may 20 at 2 am in the morning. it was uneventful morning. i do not

think you can hear? that was recorded for my unit. as you can see, it is hard to see anything because i am behind the tree, which is a good sign, but still i can hear whatever is going on at the gas station. speaking of light pollution there is certainly going to be some light pollution . so, this picture is taken

from my unit. currently, you see most of the ghosts covered by the trees in front of my building, but, as current permit allows, they are going to be removed. this is, i would imagine, the kind of you i will have from my apartment.. i also want to speak up on behalf of other residents in the residential -- okay >> clerk: mr. bock sure we hear from that apartment anything further? no to it okay. the permit holder? >> testifier: just a viewpoint mac from the image he showed you is