Board grants neighbors jurisdiction over tree‑removal permit at 650 Illinois Street

Neighbors and a hired urban forester told the San Francisco Board of Appeals on March 19 that two eucalyptus trees at 650 Illinois Street (also referenced as 2051 Third Street) are significant and that the Department of Public Works failed to post the statutorily required notices on the trunks. The requesters asked the Board to take jurisdiction over the tree‑removal permit after they said they learned of the removal only after the appeal period had passed.

The permit holder, Rick Price of Raintree Partners, told the Board DPW followed its standard practice by posting notices on poles and, on the fence in front of the trees. "In total, there were 6 postings along Illinois Street," Price said, and he urged denial of the jurisdiction request because the appeal deadline had already passed.

Chris Buck of DPW Urban Forestry described the site conditions and explained that the fence and barbed wire made posting on the trunks impracticable. Buck said staff placed multiple notices on utility poles and a notice on the fence and that when he revisited the block a month and a half later he still found several notices on poles. "We follow the code," Buck said, adding that staff tries to be reasonable when tree trunks are not visually accessible.

Multiple nearby residents and an urban forester hired by the requesters countered that they never saw notices on the trunks and that the postings visible from the street were wrapped in cellophane and difficult to read. One commenter, Ray Moritz, said he examined the trees and placed them in the 24‑inch DBH size class, noting their local ecological and visual significance.

After questioning and deliberation, several commissioners said they were persuaded that the City's posting did not conform to the "shall" language in the code and that relying on pole postings alone did not provide adequate public notice in this case. Commissioner Huang moved to grant the jurisdiction request; Commissioners Fung, Lazarus and Honda voted Aye (Vice President Hurtado was absent). Jurisdiction was granted 4–0, and the requesters were given a five‑day window to file a formal appeal to challenge the permit itself.

The Board’s action was procedural: it gives the neighborhood a chance to make a formal appeal on the tree‑removal permit rather than automatically foreclosing review because of the prior expiration of the initial appeal period. The Department of Public Works said it will take cues from the hearing about trunk posting when trunks are not readily accessible.