Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forestry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies request to remove two Monterey pines at 785 Third Avenue
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 3–0 on Oct. 24, 2018 to deny homeowner Joy Bianchi’s appeal to remove two 95-year-old Monterey pines at 785 Third Avenue, directing the Bureau of Urban Forestry to prioritize an immediate review and ask PG&E to inspect nearby lines.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 3–0 Oct. 24, 2018 to deny an appeal by homeowner Joy Bianchi seeking a permit to remove two Monterey pines adjacent to her home at 785 Third Avenue.
Bianchi told the board the two trees — about 95 years old — have “graced 785 Third Avenue” since the 1920s but now pose hazards, saying roots had invaded the house and caused $23,552 in damage and a further $5,000 in interior losses. She said heaved sidewalks had caused falls, branches had struck people and vehicles, and the trees’ proximity to the roof and windows raised safety concerns.
Chris Buck, urban forester for the San Francisco Public Works Bureau of Urban Forestry, presented photos and an arborist assessment. Buck said the species (Pinus radiata) has been affected statewide by pitch canker but that the two trees still showed relatively vigorous canopies and lacked certain indicators — such as flux/resin from the main trunk — that would make them immediate candidates for removal. Buck recommended upholding Public Works’ denial of a removal permit and said the city would repair sidewalk heave and prioritize pruning, noting the Bureau now maintains street trees under Proposition E.
The board’s deliberations produced a motion from Vice President Rick Swigg to deny the appeal and uphold the Public Works order that had refused the permit. The board attached conditions: the Bureau of Urban Forestry must schedule an immediate review of the trees and Public Works should request that PG&E inspect nearby power lines and report findings to the property owner. The motion carried unanimously by the three commissioners present.
Vice President Swigg summarized the outcome as upholding Public Works’ determination while directing prompt follow-up work: a prioritized sidewalk shave or repair and earlier pruning where warranted. Buck told the board Public Works will perform minor sidewalk shaving and can prune the trees during the species’ pruning season (November–February) and that if the trees later meet removal criteria Public Works will remove them at no cost to the homeowner.
The board’s action leaves the trees standing for now but requires an expedited inspection and a PG&E evaluation on line clearance. The Bureau of Urban Forestry is expected to report its findings to the property owner following the inspection.
