Pull to refresh
Logo
San Francisco board saves 25-year-old sycamore as city moves to limit tree appeals

San Francisco board saves 25-year-old sycamore as city moves to limit tree appeals

Rule Changes San Francisco, CA local

Mayor Daniel Lurie's PermitSF ordinance would strip independent review of hazardous tree removals.

3 days ago: Board of Supervisors takes up tree ordinance

Overview

Updated Yesterday

San Francisco's Board of Appeals voted 4-0 to stop the Department of Public Works from cutting down a healthy 25-year-old sycamore in Potrero Hill. The city wanted the tree removed to build an Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant curb ramp; the board said Public Works hadn't met its burden of proof.

The same board then voted 4-0 to oppose the ordinance. Mayor Daniel Lurie's proposal goes before the Board of Supervisors on Sept. 1. It would end Board of Appeals review for hazardous trees and shorten removal timelines; the sycamore appeal would survive because the tree wasn't classified hazardous.

Why it matters

If the ordinance passes, San Francisco residents lose an independent check on city tree removals, and the time to appeal shrinks.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

4-0
Board of Appeals vote to save sycamore
The board ruled unanimously that Public Works hadn't justified the removal.
2
City-initiated tree removal appeals since 2024
The Board of Appeals told supervisors it has heard only two such cases since the start of 2024.
792
Days from tree ID to removal approval
Josh Klipp's records request showed 792 days elapsed before Public Works approved removing the sycamore.
10
Proposed appeal filing window
Down from 15 days; the Board of Appeals would also have 30 days to decide, instead of 60.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.

Play

Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.

Most of these play right now — no account needed. Sign up to save scores, keep a streak, and unlock Debate and Predict. Log in Sign Up
Predict 3 ways this could play out. Back the one you believe — contrarian picks score more when a scenario has a resolution date. Log in to play

People Involved

Organizations Involved

Timeline

November 2016 September 2026

6 events Latest: 3 days ago
Tap a bar to jump to that date
  1. Board of Supervisors takes up tree ordinance

    Latest Vote

    Mayor Lurie's street-tree ordinance, part of PermitSF, goes before the Board of Supervisors.

  2. Homeowner learns of tree removal plan

    Development

    Dan Feldman spots a city arborist outside his home and later learns the sycamore is slated for removal.

  3. Tree advocates flag proposed changes

    Notice

    SF Forest Alliance publishes alert about amendments to reduce tree protections, including removing appeal rights.

  4. Street Tree SF takes effect

    Policy

    Public Works takes over maintenance of 125,000 street trees, ending split responsibility.

  5. Voters approve Proposition E

    Election

    Voters pass charter amendment making city responsible for all street trees, with $19 million a year.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

December 2006 – September 2008

UC Berkeley oak grove tree-sit (2006–2008)

UC Berkeley planned to build a sports training center on a grove of coast live oaks. Protesters climbed into the trees and stayed for 21 months. The standoff ended when police removed the last demonstrators.

Then

The university built the center; some trees were transplanted and others were cut down.

Now

It remains a reference point for Bay Area tree defenders and shows what happens when procedural options run out.

Why this matters now

San Francisco tree defenders currently have a formal appeals route; the proposed ordinance would narrow it, potentially pushing conflicts toward direct action.

November 2016

San Francisco's Proposition E (2016)

Voters approved a charter amendment making the city responsible for maintaining all street trees and setting aside $19 million a year for tree care and sidewalk repair.

Then

Public Works took over maintenance of roughly 125,000 street trees in July 2017.

Now

The city's tree program became centralized; the San Francisco Forest Alliance says San Francisco has not net gained a street tree since 2017.

Why this matters now

The current ordinance would extend the same agency's power by limiting appeals against its removal decisions.

September 2017

California's SB 35 housing streamlining (2017)

California lawmakers passed a law allowing affordable housing projects in cities that miss state housing targets to skip discretionary review, including some review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Then

Eligible housing projects moved through approvals faster; community members lost a formal avenue to challenge them.

Now

The law became a template for later state efforts to trade public process for speed.

Why this matters now

Lurie's PermitSF ordinance makes a similar trade: faster tree removals in exchange for fewer public challenges.

Sources

(4)