Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds DPW permits for North Beach library project; appeal over ficus trees denied 4-0
Summary
After extended public comment and technical testimony, the Board of Appeals on July 11 denied appeals seeking to prevent removal of three ficus trees at the proposed North Beach library site, upholding DPW’s permit decisions and conditions. Commissioners cited DPW’s arborist findings, CEQA clearance, and construction impacts in a unanimous 4-0 vote.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 11 rejected appeals seeking to block removal of three mature ficus trees tied to the North Beach library and park project, upholding the Department of Public Works’ (DPW) permits and findings.
Myrtle Easton, the principal appellant, argued the three ficus on Columbus and Lombard avenues are significant under the Public Works Code and urged an independent process and a stay until pending litigation over the larger project is resolved. Easton presented exhibits and internal DPW emails she said showed inconsistent assessments and alleged inadequate notice to interested organizations.
Lena Chen, program manager for the Branch Library Improvement Program at DPW, outlined the project history, saying the library and master plan had been the subject of extensive planning and outreach since 2003, that the EIR and CEQA findings were certified and upheld by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, and that the project team planned to start construction in summer 2012. DPW Urban Forester Carla Short described structural issues, past limb and root loss on the ficus, and concluded construction impacts would likely cause significant root loss and potentially kill the trees.
Speakers for and against tree removal appeared in a lengthy public-comment period. Local architects and arborists (including Ted Kipping and others) urged options to save trees — exploratory root trenches, protective measures, and phased pruning — while many neighborhood residents and project supporters emphasized the project’s lengthy planning process and the planting of numerous replacement trees and park improvements.
Commissioners pressed DPW on timing relative to the pending legal challenges and on whether tree removal could be delayed. DPW said the EIR-related court determination was expected soon, but the department planned to move cautiously and anticipated starting construction in August; DPW also said multiple arborists had concluded the trees had structural problems and that construction impacts would be substantial.
After questioning and deliberation, Vice President Frank Fung moved to deny the appeal and uphold the DPW permit on the basis stated in the DPW order. The vote was unanimous, 4-0.
The board’s action upholds DPW’s determination that removal is justified based on structural conditions and construction impacts; DPW and project staff said replacement plantings and other landscape work are part of the approved project. Several speakers had urged keeping trees until litigation is resolved; the board’s order does not stay construction but commissioners asked that trees not be demolished prior to actual start of construction activities.
