Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trees And Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals conditions Irving Streetscape planting plan after split community vote
Summary
After competing merchant and resident preferences surfaced in a public vote, the San Francisco Board of Appeals approved a motion directing Public Works to revise its Irving Streetscape planting plan to reflect a mixed species compromise; the board’s action conditions the permit on the department’s alternate plan.
San Francisco — The Board of Appeals on April 20 directed the Department of Public Works to revise the Irving Streetscape planting plan after hearing competing public input over which species should line Irving Street between 19th and 20th avenues.
Mike Reager, project manager for San Francisco Public Works, told the board the project team recorded 212 votes in outreach: 90 at a community meeting and 120 mailed ballots. ‘‘We received 212 total votes from the community,’’ Reager said, and reported that community respondents favored a small‑leaf Tristania as the top choice while merchants preferred windmill palms.
Appellants from the Mid Sunset Neighborhood Association argued the full voting results strongly favored canopy trees. ‘‘This shows that our community does care and does want our voices to be heard,’’ an appellants’ representative said, citing 52 percent support for Tristania as the first choice and a larger points‑based margin for canopy species.
Public Works presented an alternative compromise after the outreach: remove 33 street trees as authorized but plant a mix of 48 windmill palms and 20 small‑leaf Tristania trees, with Tristania placed primarily in mid‑block locations to satisfy neighbors who favor canopy cover.
Chris Buck, the city’s urban forester, described the proposed mix as a reasonable design response to split preferences, noting the approach is within standard urban‑forest design practice. Merchants told the board they preferred palms because they are wind‑tolerant and low‑maintenance; some residents countered that canopy trees improve shade and the pedestrian environment.
Vice President Frank Fung moved to ‘‘grant the appeal and to condition [the] appeal on the revision of the design and number of trees as presented by DPW.’’ Commissioners Lazarus, Honda, Wilson and Swigg voted aye; the motion carried 5–0. The Board’s action means Public Works must finalize a revised planting plan consistent with its alternate recommendation before the permit stands as approved.
Public Works and Urban Forestry said they will return with a map and planting plan that show exact locations for the Tristania and palm trees. The Board’s ruling does not itself change the underlying Public Works order; it directs the department to adopt the alternate planting configuration as a condition of the permit.
