>> vice president lazarus: any other discussion? >> president swig: i would uphold the motion by commissioner chang [indiscernible] rent is expensive. people do not have the wherewithal to pay san francisco rents, they have to stay somewhere. some sleep on the streets, and the student population is particularly vulnerable. we've seen evidence where people do break the law and turn that study room, living room, dining room, you name it, and it gets to be a bedroom. not only for a bedroom, but a

bedroom for multiple people, and it's impossible for building inspectors to keep up with that because the staffing levels are not there, and it's not their fault that they're understaffed, so it's up to the cotenant, unfortunately. the burden becomes the cotenant in the building to look out and file protests when they see abuses happening. so i support commissioner chang, and i just wanted to shed some -- it's not that we're turning our backs on this, but according to the statutes, this permit was properly issued. >> clerk: okay. so we have a motion from commissioner chang to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it was properly issued. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so that motion

carries 4-0, and the appeal is denied. thank you. we're moving onto items 8-a and 8-b. these are appeal numbers 22-025 and 22-026, dan feldman and joshua klipp versus san francisco public works bureau of urban forestry as 695 rhode island street, appealing the issuance of a public works order, approval to remove one street tree with replacement per the detailed procedures outlined. this is order 206-241, and since mr. feldman is not here,

we will hear from joshua klipp first. mr. klipp, you have seven minutes. >> thanks. i'd like to share my screen. and you -- can you see my slide show? >> clerk: yes. >> okay. thank you. good evening, commissioners and all members of the public. i want to start out by calling out a statement in the department's brief. mr. klipp states that it is [indiscernible] to rely on the upon of mr. garbelotto. i explained that i learned about transplantation from acting director carlo short. i learned from director short that transplanting a tree is a delicate operation, and it

depends on the amount of root mass that can be preserved. if enough root mass cannot be extricated, the industry cannot stressfully transplant. no, i don't think it's irresponsible to rely on the opinion of an expert, i think it's irresponsible to rely on the opinion of someone that never saw the tree. i hope that in the future, public works does not take the opinion of experts simply because they're experts but also does the work to make sure they have sufficient foundations. also, it's worth noting that his conclusion is, biodiversity is one of the keys to maintain the resilience of the urban

forest. for this reason, gingko bilobas may not necessarily be the best selection for trees planted on our streets, yet gingkos are the vast majority of our trees. from my perspective, it seems a little disingenuous that the city would ignore the existing mountain of evidence.

this leads me to the slide in the photo, not because i love this movie, but because of what looks to me on the outside to take any effort to get this tree out of the way to build a driveway. when i look at this saga, it looks to me saying whatever it takes to get this garage installed that an automobile can have a roof over its head as soon as possible. i don't know the applicants, but what i want to point out is the horribly flawed process that they got swept up here in san francisco. planning approved a new driveway requiring the removal

of this established tree from its home because apparently the facade of the house is more than 45 years old. i'll tell you what's more than 45 years old. me, asbestos, lead pipes, and yet, planning has the wherewithal to change its codes to make sure that these harmful things are removed from the environment, except for me. i've sat here for hours now listening to how much consideration we give to things like windows, shadows, and wireless antennas. shouldn't trees be given the same consideration? while the department has denied the request to remove some

mature trees that have conflicted with garages. this board is the only place we members of the public have to go and beg you to preserve critical green infrastructure despite planning's pen chant for 45-year-old facades. having said that, in a way, i'm glad to see the say anything approach because it underscores the city ought to be doing it in the first place. why does nts planning look for ways to preserve trees, or, hold onto your hats, building driveways and garages increase use of private transportation. private transportation is the second greatest polluter in the city of san francisco. this all means that san francisco is literally ripping out green infrastructure to add

impermeable surfaces. until planning changes its ways and until this board says enough, we finally need more trees and not more garages, i'm going to keep coming here because this is not an acceptable path forward because we are only six years away from failing or climate action plan. public works seems to have no problem exempting this project from green infrastructure.

without a reliable mechanism that triggers meaningful consequences here, i respectfully request the permit be denied. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. vice president lazarus, i originally told the permit -- the determination holder and the department they had double the time since they're responding to two appeals, but since we didn't have testimony or a response from the first appellant, do we want to limit the time to seven minutes and three minutes or... >> vice president lazarus: i think the normal time would be sufficient. >> clerk: okay. so mr. [indiscernible], can you present your response in seven minutes, considering you're only responding to one matter?

>> i just wanted to mention one thing, get into the limited time that we now have, which i understand, during the discretionary review process which we mentioned earlier, the appellant, mr. feldman, never once mentioned the tree. during the community outreach when we met with neighbors, not a single tree. it wasn't until the project was approved at planning 7-0 that mr. feldman sought out a different way to try to defeat the project and then started to focus on the tree. with that, i will pass it over to [indiscernible]. >> good evening, commissioners and mr. president. i'll go quickly since our time is running. we do have a slide, but i will give a brief synopsis. we've always planned this home

to have the tree. there is a slide here. >> clerk: do you mind stating your name for the record. >> my name is mark demolanta. i'm a licensed architect in the state of california, and i've conducted my business for the last 19 years here in the city. there was never a situation where we talked about not having the tree. the gingko tree is the existing tree, and that's why we're calling it the existing gingko tree. i guess another tree can be brought up, but we're talking

about relocating the existing gingko tree. the appellant sought out to hire the u.c. professor with a very high background who has done a lot of work with the city of san francisco and for the city of san francisco, but this is not a local gardener or landscape architect, this is an individual that we obviously rely and trust his information and has written a very extensive rate plan that we don't always get in projects. i'm very happy to have that included in these projects because we don't always get that included in this caliber of plan. lastly, i just want to say that we're consistent with all of the green plantings in san

francisco and in the neighborhood and in the surrounding area. i think i used up most of my time, so i'll -- >> clerk: you have four minutes. >> i'll yield to the -- >> clerk: okay. thank you. >> [indiscernible] unfortunately amy cannot be here tonight because she's a baker and she goes to work at 3:00 a.m. we have very deep roots here in san francisco. my parents moved here in 1983, and my brothers and i went to public schools here. amy and i actually got married here at city hall in december 2017. we bought our home in 2018.

we'll also be bringing my father, who has difficulty walking right now because he had a stroke, to live with us. my brother and his family only live five blocks away, so what is before you today is whether we'll be permitted to relocate the gingko tree that is in front of the house by a few feet. i want to ensure you that my wife and i are supporters of the environment. we're not asking you to remove a tree from the city canopy. we're asking you to move an existing tree with the help of a very well respected u.c. berkeley scientist with 35 years of experience. we believe in trees and will do everything we can to ensure that the gingko tree flourishes

in our new home. we want to treat the tree as if it were a part of our family. as such, we kindly and respectfully ask that please uphold the original decision granted almost seven months ago, in october 2021. on behalf of amy and my entire family, thank you for your time and consideration. >> clerk: thank you. you have 1:40. i don't know if you want to use that time or -- okay. you'll have time in rebuttal, as well. okay. we'll now hear from the department of urban forestry. mr. buck, you have seven minutes. >> good evening, commissioners and president swig. good to see you. i just want to thank you for your service during the pandemic. it was amazing to see everybody

come here. great to see everyone, and i hope that president swig, you feel better soon. with that said, i just want to say that i completely share appellant klipp's frustration. i first protested a tree proposed for removal. it was the removal of two brazilian pepper street in san francisco when i was a coordinator for friends of the urban forest. i remember where it was, i remember where i was standing. i remember the species, i remember everything about it, and i was incredulous that street trees would be removed in favor of a garage, so i just want to say that i share that visceral experience. i know that he's not here this

evening, but we did receive mr. feldman's testimony at the public works hearing, and while i did not support the request for rescheduling, mr. feldman did state that he opposed the removal of the tree, spoke at the hearing and submitted a letter. i'm not questioning his intent. i believe he wishes to prevent the removal of this tree, but during the absence of a brief from mr. feldman, today during lunch, not before the hearing, i pulled it up to see where mr. feldman lives. he was two houses uphill in a vertical addition. no mention of a tree.

i'm speaking to the public who tune in every month or so to learn more about these projects. turning more to mr. klipp's appeal, this street tree is only a three-inch dime center tree. we've had really big trees that conflict for removal, where we're losing a tree and a replantable site. in this case, it's a small tree, and there is room to plant adjacent in the same property. with that, i'm going to show some slides.

the more i prepared for the hearing, the more i was surprised, a bit shocked. this tree was planted with a permit 20 years ago, so 20 years of growth, and this is all we have to show for it. why is public works supporting the planting of this young tree? 20 years, and this is all the growth we have. i'm here to say that we will fight for trees that are an amazing asset to the community. the more images of the tree in the side. i've been to the site myself. i've reviewed the plans, i've made measurements. there is room to plant, shift this transplanted tree anywhere

from six to 8 feet downhill. i've been to the site, corroborating the measurements, and this site is replantable with the site. there is room to open it up as much as possible to be able to make that transplant successful. spacing is a challenge. we always want greater spacing, but we also have guidelines on that. the gingko tree is a large stature tree at maturity, and this tree is under power lines, so it's going to be capped physically in its height, and ideally, we'd have more spacing between the trees, but we believe we have the bare minimum distance that we can work with. also, i wanted to point out something that was not pointed out in the existing public

works decision. public works has an order that regulates the planting of street trees. our staff didn't bring this up, and it wasn't brought up at the hearing, but overthe years, having trees in conflict with proposed garages, when the trees are relatively young and can be transplanted or replaced with the same amount of trees or greater, we actually approve that, so i just wanted to bring this to your attention. public works will typically approve a removal permit application for tree removal in the following cases. the first item is that the tree is unhealthy. the next one, if the applicant proposes to relocate the existing tree at the same property, and public works

determines the transplant is likely to succeed, this is something that i think we should have had in the findings and the resulting decision. i think that would have resulted in a little more trust with the public. this isn't about conspiracy or cutting corners, this is about having a ph.d. scientist who got his degree at one of the best urban forestry departments in the country making his

decision and the work that he and people like him do for forestry. i totally agree with mr. klipp, that policy wise something needs to change. i would suggest in a few months on the work for department of sanitation and streets, you'll have a commission. that mite be a great place for us to start. it would be great if we were present at some of these discretionary reviews so we could have some of the conversation all at once. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. we have a question from president swig. >> president swig: hello. i heard the talk about moving the tree and how it was delicate and complex. as you know, my input has been of saving as much of the canopy

in san francisco as much as possible. one thing that i've heard, and i won't masquerade as an arborist, but one of the things you have to take into consideration is the root ball. how can you move this root ball without fear of losing the tree? >> in space to excavate, in this case, it's going to be moved over three to 6 feet. large roots of the tree will be cut in order to bring this tree over. if this tree were taller or had a different center of gravity, the engineering would be a lot

different. this tree is a low squat. it has a raised trunk taper and flare, so it's -- you want to -- as mr. garbelotto outlined in his report, you're going to get as much of that root mass as possible. in this particular case, again, we have a tree that i would say abnormally small for 20 years, so there are very specific guidelines on doing that. again, if i'm -- i'm not putting down east bay, but if it was bob in the east bay saying they're going to be able to do something, i'm going to ask my staff to take a closer look to see if they can do that. but in this case, mr. garbelotto is a scientist, specifically, a molecular

scientist, and he know what goes into moving the tree. that's why we put in the decision if the tree doesn't establish properly, then we'll require an exact replacement of 36-inch box tree on the property. >> president swig: so the bad news is it's a pretty underperforming tree as far as age goes, but the good news is it's an underperforming tree and it has a good chance of survival, given it will have a smaller root system. am i interpreting that correctly? >> yes, you are. >> president swig: all right. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. we are now moving onto public comment. if there's anyone here for public comment, you may raise your hand. okay. you have two minutes, [indiscernible]. please go ahead. >> hi.

can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, please go ahead. >> my name is [indiscernible], and i've lived in san francisco for more than 20 years. i'm the founder of a community garden, called the sisterhood gardens, and i'm involved in projects to make our world more sustainable and more greener. i've spoken to these property owners, and i'm calling to support their plans to remodel a fixer upper. it's a very difficult decision to choose a tree or to choose a garage, but their proposal is not to choose one or the other. their proposal is to move the tree, and as i've heard before, the tree can be moved, and if that does not survive, they are willing to plant another one, so i am here to support their decision of moving the tree. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. okay. john nolty, please go ahead.

>> hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, go ahead. >> thank you. hi, commissioners. my concern is the tree, as stated, a gingko was one of the top 20 trees planted in san francisco, and it was underperforming, as stated by mr. -- by chris buck, and the issue is at hand here is it has possibly a small root ball, so the problem i have it how much are you going to dig up, the root ball so you can move it a couple of feet? how much of the street are you going to go into to tear up that root ball so you can move it a couple of feet? that's the question. it's not inches, we're talking about feet of dirt that you have to take out to move it. so i'm concerned about the

procedure here and the precedent that we've set in san francisco. i've heard about moving houses, but i've not heard about moving established trees to another location in hearings, so i think we're getting into sort of another precedent that's being done today, so that's why i'm glad that josh brought it up. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. is there any further public comment? i see one hand. michael nolty, go ahead. two minutes. >> yes, michael nolty, n-o-l-t-y. nobody can deny that we have a row of canopy in this particular neighborhood, and i just hope that -- excuse me. that's not me. i just hope regardless of the

[indiscernible] that's said tonight -- i don't know what's going on here. any way, the real outcome should be the fact that the tree survives and it's -- it survives and thornton thomasetti -- and it's taken care of the next three years. i haven't really heard that part, and i think that the property owner needs to understand that they're going to have to take care of the tree for the next three years as part of this process because we're going to have to take care of it.

we're in a drought, and you don't get extra points for removing trees, so how much water are you going to have to use when removing a tree? and i'm still getting feedback. i'm not sure where that's coming from. thank you. >> clerk: okay. thank you. if there's anymore public comment, raise your hand, please. okay. we'll move onto rebuttal. mr. klipp, you have three minutes. >> thank you. first, probably, the fact that it's a three-inch diameter tree doesn't surprise me because gingkos are slow growing. it should come as no surprise. it's also a major reason that public works plants them all over the city because the slow growing nature of a gingko also minimizes their transplant

cost. in all of this work and doing it in depth, i have never heard of this existing policy in even a single discussion until tonight. so if it's existed all this time, then i'm not sure why we even needed the professor to weigh-in and suggest that it be done. if it exists, why didn't the department bring it up and discuss its policy. third, it's brought up that it's awful to have these healthy trees removed for building homes and garages? why not make planning come to these hearings to defend their decision to ignore and approve the removal of trees. why is it 2022 and planning

does not consider existing trees when we're in a climate emergency? public works still has not addressed the two concerns that i mentioned in the brief, defending removing trees all over san francisco. >> clerk: rebuttal. >> let me state, the remodel is requiring us to redo the sidewalk. [indiscernible] these are all on the -- obviously, the

request with the client to make sure we get our ducks in a roe before we -- when we get the permit application together. with that being said, when they're talking about [indiscernible] get the ball as needed, and relocate it properly as outlined. so with that being said, we're not trying to shave off a little bit of the sidewalk and cut the roots just to stay within, you know, not messing up the sidewalk. that whole sidewalk will be done, and that whole area will be done because of the nature of this project. the other thing i was going to say is the size of this project is unique because applicant, i believe, is rooted into the neighborhood with a project

like this and the time is took the past four years is a devotion to the project and the property. as you know, getting a house just wherever you want it to be in the city, it's not easy, so i actually commend the client to make this proper investment and also do the project, and that's what we're going to do, just do the project completely properly like we've done with all the permits and application, so thank you. >> clerk: thank you. mr. buck, you have three minutes.

>> minimum fine for illegal removal of a street tree or significant tree is $10,000 or three times the appraised value, whichever is the greater of the two, and we've been issuing those fines for a while now. we're not losing our power. we've got a mandate to maintain all the street trees in the city and take on the responsibility. we've been doing that. we're coming up on year five, so it shows the strengthening power that public works has, and i agree that this discussion needs to keep happening. regarding some of the very specific site-by-site examples of when we approve a gingko and when we don't, mr. klipp cited

a decision around the corner from him a couple of years ago, we often cite species that have similar growth habits or patterns. if we have five different growth rates on a block, it means we're hopscotching across the city, and we'll fail to meet our mandates across the city, so it's one reason why we went with a gingko. we have a basis and a consistency on why and how we're recommending certain species. with that, i do believe that that covers just a few points i wanted to make known. we do enforce -- we do have mechanisms, and the new changes to our code really beef up the

repeated offenses, so thank you. >> clerk: thank you. commissioners, this matter's submitted. commissioners? >> president swig: i'll start. i -- i'm very sympathetic to mr. klipp's statement about while we're trying to cutback on emissions, why are we building more garages, but that's not our job here. our job here is to interpret whether a project, and that's a policy decision, mr. klipp, but i'll support you as you move forward on that pursuit, but we don't look at that here. we look at projects and are they in compliance with statutes, and then, we move forward on them or not. in this case, what my observation is there's been a

conscious and confident effort by this homeowner to enhance the neighborhood and take a blighted house, make it better, look forward to living there for a long period of time. yes, he's adding a garage. it's his choice, and it's wholly appropriate according to the statutes and has been very conscious about taking care of a tree, not trying to say oh, okay, we'll replace it with five somewhere else, but we want to remove this tree, keep it in the neighborhood, and maintain the canopy in this neighborhood. so i have no problems with this project whatsoever. i think it's been done responsibly and according to all statutes, and therefore, i would deny the appeal; that the permit was properly issued. >> clerk: okay.

we have a motion from president swig to deny the appeal on the basis it was properly issued. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: okay. so that motion carries 4-0, and that appeal is denied, so that would conclude the hearing, and we are adjourned. >> vice president lazarus: thank you. >> president swig: thank you very much.

the tenderloin is home to families, immigrants, seniors, merchants, workers and the housed and unhoused who all deserve a thriving neighborhood to call home. the tenderloin initiative was launched to improve safety, reduce crime, connect people to services and increase investments in the

neighborhood. as city and community-based partners, we work daily to make these changes a reality. we invite you to the tenderloin history, inclusivity make this neighborhood special. >> we're all citizens of san francisco and we deserve food, water, shelter, all of those things that any system would. >> what i find the most fulfilling about being in the tenderloin is that it's really basically a big family here and i love working and living here. >> [speaking foreign language] >> my hopes and dreams for the tenderloin are what any other community organizer would want for their community, safe,

clean streets for everyone and good operating conditions for small businesses. >> everything in the tenderloin is very good. the food is very good. if you go to any restaurant in san francisco, you will feel like oh, wow, the food is great. the people are nice. >> it is a place where it embraces all walks of life and different cultures. so this is the soul of the tenderloin. it's really welcoming. the. >> the tenderloin is so full of color and so full of people. so with all of us being together and making it feel very safe is challenging, but we are working on it and we are getting there.

[♪♪♪] >> i just wanted to say a few words. one is to the parents and to all of the kids. thank you for supporting this program and for trusting us to create a soccer program in the bayview. >> soccer is the world's game, and everybody plays, but in the united states, this is a sport that struggles with access for certain communities. >> i coached basketball in a coached football for years, it is the same thing. it is about motivating kids and keeping them together, and giving them new opportunities. >> when the kids came out, they

had no idea really what the game was. only one or two of them had played soccer before. we gave the kids very simple lessons every day and made sure that they had fun while they were doing it, and you really could see them evolve into a team over the course of the season. >> i think this is a great opportunity to be part of the community and be part of programs like this. >> i get to run around with my other teammates and pass the ball. >> this is new to me. i've always played basketball or football. i am adjusting to be a soccer mom. >> the bayview is like my favorite team. even though we lose it is still fine. >> right on. >> i have lots of favorite memories, but i think one of them is just watching the kids enjoy themselves. >> my favorite memory was just having fun and playing. >> bayview united will be in soccer camp all summer long. they are going to be at civic centre for two different

weeklong sessions with america scores, then they will will have their own soccer camp later in the summer right here, and then they will be back on the pitch next fall. >> now we know a little bit more about soccer, we are learning more, and the kids are really enjoying the program. >> we want to be united in the bayview. that is why this was appropriate >> this guy is the limit. the kids are already athletic, you know, they just need to learn the game. we have some potential college-bound kids, definitely. >> today was the last practice of the season, and the sweetest moment was coming out here while , you know, we were setting up the barbecue and folding their uniforms, and looking out onto the field, and seven or eight of the kids were playing. >> this year we have first and second grade. we are going to expand to third, forth, and fifth grade next year bring them out and if you have middle school kids, we are starting a team for middle school. >> you know why? >> why? because we are? >> bayview united. >> that's right.

>> we broke ground in december of last year. we broke ground the day after sandy hook connecticut and had a moment of silence here. it's really great to see the silence that we experienced then and we've experienced over the years in this playground is now filled with these voices. >> 321, okay. [ applause ] >> the park was kind of bleak. it was scary and over grown. we started to help maclaren park when we found there wasn't any money in the bond for this park maclaren. we

spent time for funding. it was expensive to raise money for this and there were a lot of delays. a lot of it was just the mural, the sprinklers and we didn't have any grass. it was that bad. we worked on sprinkler heads and grass and we fixed everything. we worked hard collecting everything. we had about 400 group members. every a little bit helped and now the park is busy all week. there is people with kids using the park and using strollers and now it's safer by utilizing it. >> maclaren park being the largest second park one of the best kept secrets. what's exciting about this activation in particular is that it's the first of many. it's also

representation of our city coming together but not only on the bureaucratic side of things. but also our neighbors, neighbors helped this happen. we are thrilled that today we are seeing the fruition of all that work in this city's open space. >> when we got involved with this park there was a broken swing set and half of -- for me, one thing i really like to point out to other groups is that when you are competing for funding in a hole on the ground, you need to articulate what you need for your park. i always point as this sight as a model for other communities. >> i hope we continue to work on the other empty pits that are here. there are still a lot of areas that need help

at maclaren park. we hope grants and money will be available to continue to improve this park to make it shine. it's a really hidden jewel. a lot of people don't know it's here. >> once i got the hang of it a little bit, you know, like the first time, i never left the court. i just fell in love with it and any opportunity i had to get out there, you know, they didn't have to ask twice. you can always find me on the court. [♪♪♪] >> we have been able to

participate in 12 athletics wheelchairs. they provide what is an expensive tool to facilitate basketball specifically. behind me are the amazing golden state road warriors, which are one of the most competitive adaptive basketball teams in the state led by its captain, chuck hill, who was a national paralympic and, and is now an assistant coach on the national big team. >> it is great to have this opportunity here in san francisco. we are the main hub of the bay area, which, you know, we should definitely have resources here. now that that is happening, you know, i i'm looking forward to that growing and spreading and helping spread the word that needs -- that these people are here for everyone. i think it is important for people with disabilities, as well as able-bodied, to be able to see and to try different

sports, and to appreciate trying different things. >> people can come and check out this chairs and use them. but then also friday evening, from 6:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., it will be wheelchair basketball we will make sure it is available, and that way people can no that people will be coming to play at the same time. >> we offer a wide variety of adaptive and inclusion programming, but this is the first time we have had our own equipment. [♪♪♪] in is the rec

and park commission. call the roll y. buell. >> anderson. >> here >> hallisy. >> here. >> commissioner jones >> here. >> commissioner louie. >> here and grift and i know mazzola have excused absences. >> san francisco rec and park commission acknowledge we ocpilot home lavenltd the ramaytush ohlone people from the san francisco pel anyone slam we honor the ramaytush ohlone peoples for commitment to mother earth. as the protectors of this land and with their translations the ramaytush ohlone have never lost nor forgotten responsibilities as the care takers and all peopleho