Supe’s legislation would limit number of ficus trees Public Works could axe
District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen told Mission Local Tuesday that her office will take an active role in negotiating between 24th Street ficus tree advocates and the city’s Public Works department.
The supervisor said her office has been well aware of the years-long strife between community advocates hoping to spare dozens of ficus trees and the city agency pushing to axe them — “But, after all the community advocacy, Public Works didn’t move as much as we had hoped.”
Her concern, she said, was largely with the discrepancies in the numbers. Public Works originally announced it would remove 77 trees. Then, after public outcry, reduced the number to 48. However, in early 2015, a consulting firm advised the city to remove only 16 trees.
The 2015 recommendation came after the city paid ArborPro consultants $500,000 for a citywide tree risk assessment. (Calls and emails to ArborPro had not been returned by press time.)
“We should not be cutting down trees unless they pose a danger to the public,” Ronen said, echoing the concerns of many about falling limbs, breached sewer mains and buckling pavement. These and other dangers have been presented by Public Works at two community meetings and in “many public forums,” including the department’s website, notes department’s spokeswoman Nancy Sarieh.
Ronen shares those concerns, but questions the numbers. “We spent a significant amount of money on an expert consultant to do that analysis. That consultant came back and said, ’16 trees.’”
In its assumed role, Ronen’s office plans to hold meetings with community activists, such as the group of appellants who fought the decision of the Public Works department at the most recent Board of Appeals meeting.
But working with San Francisco Public Works is also key, Ronen said. “I talked to the director [Mohammed Nuru] about continuing the hearing last week so we had more time to work with the department. He agreed to do that, which I appreciate.”
To that end, the supervisor said, she left Nuru a voice message to give him a “heads-up” about her intention to ask the city attorney to draft legislation at the Board of Supervisors’ meeting requiring an upper limit of 16 trees to be removed by Public Works.
“We’re trying to play a problem-solving role,” Ronen aide Paul Monge told Mission Local. “Thankfully, we have a two-month window until March 11, which is when the next Board of Appeals hearing is scheduled, to really bring all the parties to the table and work out a plan around not just removal but also replanting that people feel very invested in and excited about.”
Update, Jan. 16: Following publication of this story, San Francisco Public Works claimed that its work with ArborPro was not as extensive as Ronen stated. To wit:
We did not pay ArborPro for a citywide tree risk assessment. We paid them for an inventory. Very different. The primary purpose of the inventory (or census) was to record the species, size and location of all 125,000 street trees. While ArborPro made basic maintenance recommendations, they did not perform tree assessments at all, and certainly did not perform risk assessments. ArborPro spent a few minutes at each tree – at most. Our certified professional arborists spent many hours re-assessing these trees on 24th Street.
In addition, the inventory was completed in 2016 for most of the trees along 24th Street, and a lot can change in three years.
Listen to the experts who were hired to look specifically at the 24th St trees. We can plant new trees for the ones they say is dangerous.
Ficus-deniers who don’t respect expert advice are just like those who don’t respect the climate scientists. Lets be adults and make the tough call to cut down the dangerous trees and replant with native ones that won’t cause damage and injury.
>We spent a significant amount of money on an expert consultant to do that analysis.
Awesome, sounds like a great use of taxpayer dollars… cut em down, all of them. Plant something native. Done. My fee is 1 year of free pizza from Delfina, which, probably amounts to about $500,000.
I’m sorry, but anytime neighborhood folks have asked for Ronan’s office to engage with branches of SFGov to address real problems in the neighborhood such as 1) bus lanes and SFMTA traffic and parking changes that have disproportionately affected theMission’s working class and people of color 2) Public Works “projects” that are basically tax payer money giveaways to out of town 3rd parties for work that is ineffective and/or defective – sidewalk replacements that crack after a year, sewer “vacuum” pumper trucks in areas with no flooding, missing crossing lights or dangerous intersections 3) unlicensed clubs and their endless noise issues 4) tent camp bike chop-shops and open drug dealing near kindergartens and schools… etc etc… her office always responds that she has no authority over city agencies. But now, the ficus silliness that should have ended years ago with their removal – somehow warrants her previously unavailable intervention?
Maria,
Ronen has surpassed Peskin for most effective supe title.
I’m at 14th and Valencia and watch the school kids crossing what
was a poorly marked crossing.
The side of the road I live on is in Mandelman’s district but he
ignored our calls to have the crosswalks re-painted.
Absolutely no response.
Ronen got the crosswalks painted in 18 days.
She also has kept our City loved ‘LaPulagita’ going for last couple of years.
Go Hillary!
h.
These trees are turning into the 24th Street version of Sloat Boulevard’s Doggie Diner Head.