Asked them to stop operating they the immediately, the second one over the hearing before you i didnt know anything about that but asked do Public HealthDepartment Staff on their own if we were able to operate and staff said, yes that is documented by email and the board of appeals staff knows about that that was a mistake and ones that was discovered within it was two or three hours of operating i had them stop immediately i dont know about that i know the general rule about a preempt still suspended and had them stop immediately. Thank you i have ha i have a question for the department of health. Good evening. Im june the manager for the medical Cannabis Dispensary Program at the San Francisco department of health. Can you verify what the department did in those instance. We made a mistake i take full responsibility for 2 we can call that a supervisor issue i was out of town at the time of the last hearing not present to be providing appropriate supervision and direction our inspector did his slut best to give information when asked and he take responsibility for it. So to clarify this therefore you would not blame the project sponsor for opening. I would not. Thank you. Then my question is that in the first hearing i voted to hear the appeal and lost but that was generally based on a clerical error or other error from our Department Im not trying to hammer you in any what what happened there i mean. Essentially the distancing as a supervisor again, i just started managing the program in april of this year its been a challenging year personal for me and i am some of my supervisory skills have fallen by the way side. And a followup question is with the passing i believe proposition 64 if youre department is having issues with a limited amount of stuff how will they handle it going forward. Were hoping for additional staff and support that is going to be a big job. Okay. Thank you very much. I very sympathetic to the public i think to verbalize that last time i voted in the direction i was the final vote in the direction that the ruling went i felt that i heard the publics pain those who felt they were not heard we heard the source of that pain a moment going ago through unfortunately mismanagement . About new evidence and new and Important Information that was not presented from our last hearing and im not hearing anything that we didnt hear the last time equip for a few statutes that are global around california that are repudiated by the deputy Zoning Administrator corey i hope i got our title right. I see no reason to have a new hearing according to the rules. I was in support of appeal last hearing the rules and the bar for a rehearing are extremely high i dont see any manifest injustice and after reviewing the appellants brief that was the same exact material i reviewed in the past hearing ill not support another hearing either. Make a motion. Motion to deny the request for a rehearing due to the fact no new and important evidence has before present and the threshold for that will constitute a hearing or rejuvenate a new hearing has not been met commissioner swig to deny the request commissioner fung commissioner lazarus commissioner president honda and commissioner wilson that motion carries are voting of 5 to zero and next christopher versus the public works of urban forestry the property others vermont streets of a tree Real Estate Brokerage for two acacia trees with one with 24 inch box well start with the appellant maybe take a moment to let the room clear you have 7 minutes to present your case. House that. Kari i think that mike is set up for me. Sorry. Sorry. Okay. Is this okay can i have the pc . Good evening were here about two trees on vermont street tree number one is an acacia healthy what with large canopy and old we dpw standards a significant tree should receive special consideration and tree number two a smaller acacia also heath the dpw is requesting it should be removed there is no upkeep on those and in addition as you can see from the photo a third tree a peer that is connected by the root structure to tree number two the smaller one it will kill the third tree in number 2 is removed so we know there is various benefits from trees but those trees one noise reduction adjacent to the 101, two we actually have bird in the area it will destroy their habitat and 3 pollutions the highways are the center pollution the trees abate that and four it reduces stormwater run off the intersection here is below grade the sewer is clogged this will increase the problem and lastly blight because of this area board caltrans dpw didnt respond to requests to remove garbage or abate trash and it is their responsibility if they had this takes months it increases the blight and becomes a circle those photos are new from today and as you can see this is what a request and the request says quote case resolved belongs to caltrans on City Property the first reason they want to remove those trees is safety due to a closed pedestrian bridge that is next to those trees this pedestrian bridge has a closed since the 80s because of security the police and caltrans jointly agreed to close it this bridge is located the efforts of several bridges in the area on 23 and 22 and cesar chavez it is really not necessary the majority of public does not want this bridge on the majority said keep it closed why . Because the brim that are open such as faith street the 22 street bridge, the hairball, and chavez bike paths are homeless camps dpw did not maintain the existence and no hope to maintain other structures so, yeah in an ideal world well open the bridge that is kind of silly to have the infrastructure centered but in a real world we wouldnt where Mohammed Nuru director of public works in 52015 he tried to pull a fast one 30,000 on 9 led light bulks and two days of lash for dwp employees there are no lights on 22 which is right by General Hospital that is used night and day in lights on the fight streets bridge and yet installed on a closed bridge you can say conspiracy history but the investigations against the director voter fraud misappropriation of funds by state lawyers and california secret and settlements in 2011 sorry that was for a repalliation suit from a former employee of dwp how fair the hearing said theyll remove 4 trees as you can see here at the hearing they couldnt state whether that was 4 or 2, but the hearing was allowed to be continued without a clear course of action by dpw after the hearing chris buck im sure is nice but was allowed to provide Additional Information after the hearing to the hearing officer how is that fair thats not a hearing also this email states from sandra former Deputy Director no right to open the bridge that is a caltrans bridge lastly clean the bridge theres a homeless camp weve tried to get it out for awhile heres what the last response in the bridge is closed dpw cant access the debris or wait transfer to caltrans quickly sidewalk repair yes sidewalk is damaged as you can see that is lifted in a continuous manner like this for 9 or 10 years as far as i know so it is great they want to fix it but no reason to kill the trees the curb is below city standards 2 and threequarters highlevel the grade to 6 inches or 8 itches in that is state standards the root structure can remain underneath no need to kill the trees or disadvantage the root structure while fixing the walk that plan is feasible and economical a under the California Environmental quality act public agencies shouldnt approve thank you, sir, your time is up. And youll have time in rebuttal. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Buck. Welcome mr. Buck. Chris bureaucrat urban forestry with San Francisco public works ill go to overhead ive got a pretty good photo of the overall site there so there is a quite a bit Community Discussion right now about the state of this pedestrian bridge whether that will be opened or not i dont know the status of that my sense that may not open so for the moment well have to kind of table that im not here to talk about whether or not the bridge will be open what happened our project team brought to our attention a couple of trees they were concerned about at the bridge two subject trees are black acacia theyve volunteered there one is quite a sapling and in the incidental on the right this is tree number one a larger tree tree 2 subject to the appeal is the volunteer saping so the species didnt tolerant the root to repair the sidewalk we need to prune the roots of trees that cause expensive damage from the blue car thirty feet to the right and repairing the walk whether cause the tree to become severely declined in its vigor and potentially suffer a large root failure so we planted this species across San Francisco an hate and divisadero they have root failures and dont tolerant root print when we evaluated the site we immediately identified those two trees as worthy of removal the large acacia is right up against the because of that wall the retaining wall that is the ramp and heres on image of that so this is subject tree number 2 the large tree as you can see the volunteered up against the because of wall the second tree the saping and other acacia sprout here and there a back acacia a decent street in an open space that is exotic it takes over open spaces it sprouts busy feed when we evaluated those to too obvious trees that need to be removed theyll cause damage to the retaining wall and regardless of whether the ramp is open at the public works hearing we dont believe there is adequate room but offer to one 24 inch box tree to the last of this tree here and just to clarify roving the acacia right here will not impact the health of that tree well not need to remove the tree well plant within 24 inch box tree one challenge of the site the narrow growing space for mature trees further down wider we planted the trees purposely this 0 the area is two small of a space thats why we have expensive sidewalk damage it was an the retaining wall and the curve there is really no room for the roots that retaining wall must go down those roots are running up and down the sidewalk the curve is 16 inches down enough of that sort of barricade so did roots are really all in this area of the sidewalk increasing the height of the curve is not an option and so therefore public works recommends that our resulting order be upheld with the removal of acacia and the small saping where replacement with one 24 inch box tree i understand it is challenging anyone living near 101 the goal to be as much remain as much greenery as possible the challenges there is limited growing space and regardless of whether the bridge is opened up or not public works seeks the removal of those two trees well see what happens to the status whether or not the bridge opens from my perspective those are trees that should be etch removed public works seeks to make the repairs whether or not the bridge is not and planted the required replacement tree one final note our inspector for the area sarah stacey met with the appellant to talk about the concerns of the general area regarding greening that sound wall such possible public works by default is responsible for the public rightofway outside of the retaining wall there are a number of jack remand trees not doing well, well ask to be replaced too much overhang and from the eucalyptus above goss close to the site plant evergreen not a lot of extra or sidewalk damage and evergreen yearround were committed to up the amount of greenery in the area im hopeful with the passage of prop well have more trees to plant that pretty much concluded any testify testimony it is a challenging site anyone that lives across the bridge wants canopy but a confined space for planting one final comment from the project team is that one scenario to install a bulb out and plant two or three trees in the sidewalk out towards the curve in places of parking thats way down the road from the bridge is allowed to open thats one possibly mitigation that public works can pursue from the bridge is in fact, opened right now the status of bridge opening or closing i dont think anyone knows the current status at this point. Thank you, mr. Buck i have a question a scheduled repair dates slated for the sidewalk. Not yet depended on the outcome of this hearing generally id like say a few months. The second question the appellant put a document or picture on the overhead indicating that whos responsibility is it to clean the side of the pedestrian walkway where the trees are planted. What ill do following the hearing bring it to 9 attention of larry stringer he oversees the services and also our project team for the feedback im sure theyve received that that feedback he need to forward to them unfortunately, i cant speak on behalf of public works related to the cleanliness issues. Whos responsibility are you unsure of whos responsibility. I know street trees responsibility is ours i assume the area in the public rightofway will be our responsibility the state didnt have the resources to attend to the. I think the email indicated it is the states issue. I believe it is public works responsibility and theres other ordinances about whether or not you know access to the bridge to clean up the debris maybe often the bridge that needs to be figured out. Thank you sure. Is the ramp caltrans property. My sense the ramp is caltrans property and public works helps to maintain it the it is certainly on caltrans property one scenario to modify the ram to have both the we dont need to get into that. How about access to the ram is that city or state property. I believe access is it would be shared but seems like mostly on caltrans property inside caltrans property when i look at the configuration lets see if i have a side angle my sense is that the public rightofway if you go to the image to the right the image to the right there is a perpendicular fence an access point i dont know in the Property Line of the ramp is the state or set in other 6 feet my sense this is a caltrans property. But the tree was that planted by the city and the tree volunteered and kind of in. Those other trees were planted most likely by the city caltrans or refer to undocumented trees. I thought the small one was volunteer. And it was. Okay. So since youre up there can you give me a sense of the chronology that might occur in the process of removing the trees and then replacing the trees and while at the same time at some point the sidewalk might be repaired. How does that go. Sure so we would if approved for removal weve remove the trees within the next month or two after the trees are removed the large trees we need to remove the stumble another month we can bump that up to try to recognize the priority level to the board of appeals and try to satisfy the public so repair sidewalk will then occur after we removed the tree a good amount of sidewalk to repair within a few months of tree removal well go ahead and repair the sidewalks in that area well be looking at a few months. The replacement tree comes in. After we repair the sidewalk so well repair the tree as long as that sidewalk with repaired things are progressing with sidewalk repair and ord the tree make sure we have the tree in the shop ready to be planted once the sidewalk work is completed. Now this will happen can you but im sensitive to the appellant in the conversation related to what is occurred in general dpw has been unresponsive to the general situation of the space he points out that it is below grade and in addition the condition of the sidewalk might contribute to flooding or run off of more junk that would matrix into the area where the trees provide what is the safeguard im not questioning the merits of project but what im concerned with the the risks of the neighborhood should shall we say the projects extends beyond our description and fits blighted. Uhhuh. The right word blighted for on expended period of time and the tries to climb whats the protection mr. Buck. Sure one thing to point out if there are continues progress from the conversation about how modifying the retaining wall the ramp all over the place adding a stairway i see that slowing down the sidewalk repair well go ahead and install want bought and wait until that is dead in the water before we move forward with the repairs thats one potential hiccup to add to the chronology weve talked about i think the key thing here is the site as received a lot of discussion amongst the Community Clear a lot of people opposed to opening the bridge and folks feel strongly about opening that regardless of whether that is the way it is enough light has been shined open it is priority of public works to get it right thats one safeguard it has a lot of transaction supervisor cowen for district 10 is heavy involved along with the community weve met the appellant for the first time for us at the urban forestry this is the first exacts ive been with the city for a long no interaction for 11 years but showing our inspection met with the appellant on 09 issues on the same block kind of shows once in uttering hands were very, very responsive and public works will urban design responsive to the concerns of the public addressing that i mean Public Safety and compliments are huge issues for public works and although may not seem like that is to the public they dont realize how many requests and moving people in camps to have them show up the next day because of lack of policy there is a lot of reasons why not every corner of the city is spectacularly and clean in 24 7. Other situations and other policies will aside would you think that that would be prudent and with our own concerns that the decision on the walkway is still unclear at best would you think that if we were to take our suggestion about removing the trees and replacing the trees on the sidewalk we might want to tie that action not to a occur before theres clarity and closure from the city to deal with the walkway. So we my sense is that we would like to make the repairs regardless of the outcome of the bridge open or not we believe itself sidewalk now that were aware of it is hazardous we should return it to good order regardless of outcome i think we should move forward with the repairs and with tree removal make the sidewalk right get the tree out the way and focusing replanting the focus on the site. That with that said what happens if tomorrow or tomorrow in a relative short time the conversation heaps up with our best intentions the subject on the walkway heats up and suddenly goes into discussion and you kind of have a half baked project where the trees are cut down and everything comes to a halt that is what i agree with myself i was reading the