SFPUC: Permit not required for it to cut down tree

Neighbors turn to court and legal counsel

Click on pictures to enlarge and see captions.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission announced that it plans to cut down heritage oak tree despite community protest.

The tree's neighbors have turned to the court, seeking a temporary restraining order that would keep the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's axes at bay, even as the commission argued it didn't need a permit to cut down the tree.

The tree at 827 15th Avenue grows within a backyard easement controlled by the commission. Property owner Charles Berkstresser said the commission left a message on his door Friday evening (May 13) telling him the tree would be cut down Monday (May 16).

However, he said the commission has now backtracked, claiming it never intended to do so -- but it remains mum about when, exactly, the tree will get cut down. He was expecting a visit from a commission representative Monday, in between the stream of tree supporters dropping by his backyard to take a look at the 65-foot-tall tree that dwarfs his home.

Meanwhile, neighbor Mary Ann Mullen headed to court to plead the tree's case. The neighbors are questioning whether the commission ever applied for a permit to remove the tree, a step required by the heritage oak tree ordinances of both San Mateo and San Francisco counties. It's not clear at the moment which county's ordinance would govern this particular oak, since it's located in one county while the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) belongs to another.

They're also wondering why the commission disregarded two options that would save the tree while still allowing pipes for the Hetch Hetchy water improvement project to be placed underground. A report by McClenahan Consulting, an arboriculturist company, suggested as alternatives either tunneling below the tree or relocating the water pipe either above the root zone or more than 10 feet away from the trunk.

SFPUC spokeswoman Maureen Barry said public agencies aren't required to get a permit before removing a heritage tree. And the alternatives to cutting down the tree presented two problems: either the limbs and possibly the entire tree would be compromised, or the roots would eventually grow over and corrode the new pipe.

"It's fair to say the project team is as disappointed as anyone that we weren't able to find an engineering solution here," she said. Ms. Barry stressed that the pipeline project is critical to ensuring a water supply if an earthquake strikes.

Mr. Berkstresser said he just wants to see documentation showing that cutting down the tree is the only viable choice. "If it is true, then they need to show us. Document, document, document, proof," he said, emphasizing the last word.

San Mateo County's heritage tree ordinance doesn't specifically state public agencies are exempt from the permit process. Representatives from both counties were not immediately available for comment. However, the San Mateo County Building and Planning Department met with the SFPUC on Tuesday, May 17.

The Almanac has filed a public records act request with the commission for all documentation related to the tree.

The tree, estimated to be about 300 years old, was one reason Mr. Berkstresser chose that home six years ago. "It's an asset to the entire community," he said. "Frankly, it's an asset of the state. This is old growth forest."

"Granny" won't die this week, according to Ms. Barry, because the SFPUC is waiting for contractor proposals. She said the commission will send out notices to update the community once the proposals are approved.

Meanwhile, the neighbors said they're putting together legal counsel.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.


1 person likes this
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on May 18, 2011 at 12:39 pm

What a Great example of citizens coming together to do their best to make sure every effort was made to save this tree.

This tree is in San Mateo County, which has a tree ordinance. It is located on property owned by SFPUC, but none the less is in San Mateo County.

Maureen Barry SFPUC spokesperson says the utility doesn't need a permit because the tree is clearly on land it owns. This is exactly the type of discussion that should have taken place a long time ago, in public.

There are a lot of land owners that wish that statement were true. That is why we have county ordinances.

Yesterday County officials met with representatives of the SFPUC….

The big question is whether SFPUC is immune from San Mateo County's tree ordinance.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Couple brings Chinese zongzi to Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 5,702 views

Summer Cooking Classes - Free!
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 1,591 views

Don't Miss Your Exit (and other lessons from an EV drive)
By Sherry Listgarten | 6 comments | 1,253 views

More Bad News: Downtown Parking Will Get Much Worse
By Dana Hendrickson | 11 comments | 1,125 views

"Better" Dads and "Re-invigorated" Moms: Happier Couples
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 988 views


Register today!

On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Learn More