Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission initiates Urban Forest Master Plan Phase 1, pushes adoption hearing to Nov. 6
Summary
Planning staff presented Phase 1 (street trees) of San Francisco's Urban Forest Master Plan, proposing to grow the city’s street tree population by ~50,000 over 20 years and recommending a municipally funded maintenance program; after hours of public comment the commission voted unanimously to initiate a General Plan amendment and schedule a Nov. 6 adoption hearing.
Planning Department staff presented Phase 1 of San Francisco's Urban Forest Master Plan on Oct. 8, asking the Planning Commission to initiate a general‑plan amendment that would adopt the street‑tree component by reference.
John Sway, manager of the Urban Forest Master Plan, told commissioners the city's urban forest includes an estimated 700,000 trees overall and about 105,000 street trees. The plan documents a 13.7 percent citywide tree canopy and recommends growing the street tree population by roughly 50,000 trees over the next 20 years — about 2,500 new street trees a year — while also improving maintenance and distribution across neighborhoods.
Carla Short of the Department of Public Works outlined maintenance challenges, saying the department currently prunes on a 10–12 year cycle but industry standards recommend pruning every three to five years. Short said staffing has declined from 19 dedicated arborists at a prior high to about 11 and described a recent program to transfer maintenance responsibility to adjacent property owners when necessary.
Public commenters included the Urban Forestry Council, Friends of the Urban Forest, a regional Cal Fire urban forester and dozens of residents. Supporters praised the plan's research and recommendations; others urged clearer commitments on maintenance funding, questioned the removal of an earlier canopy‑coverage target from the draft, and cautioned against conflicts with the Recreation and Parks Department's Natural Areas Program.
Commissioners questioned financing options and implementation details. Staff said a street‑tree financing study (AECOM) modeled several approaches, including lighting and landscaping assessment districts, a parcel tax tied to street frontage and general obligation bonds for capital costs; staff estimated parcel tax scenarios could range from single‑digit dollars per year for some multiunit parcels up to higher amounts if park trees were included.
After discussion the commission voted unanimously to initiate the general‑plan amendment adopting Phase 1 by reference and to schedule an adoption hearing for Nov. 6.
The commission's initiation does not yet adopt the plan; substantive changes raised at the Board of Supervisors or new material returned to the commission will be considered at subsequent hearings. The Planning Department asked commissioners to submit written comments in advance of the adoption hearing.
