Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article
Facebook
Twitter
Google+1
del.icio.us.
Digg!
Yahoo! Buzz
Diigo
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Yahoo!
MyspaceMaximum fines for excessive tree pruning in the City of Santa Barbara will increase from $100 per offense to $3,000, and from $100 to $5,000 for improper tree removal. Based on the new rules, adopted by the City Council on Tuesday, December 8, minimum fines will still start at $100. Proper maintenance of trees in public spaces like parking lots-or in private set-back spaces viewable by the public-has long been a volatile issue. Regulatory lines of authority have been fractured and confusing to city employees and property owners alike. In general, actual enforcement has been toothless. In the past year, there were more than 50 complaints of excessive pruning, most of which were substantiated. In a handful of cases, damage was severe enough that the affected trees had to be removed and new ones planted. In that time, only one fine was issued. That was subsequently appealed and the fine rescinded. Under the new rules, “excessive” pruning will be defined as anything in excess of one-quarter of the tree crown. Currently, it’s one third.
Step Away from the Chain Saw
Steep New Fines for Improper Pruning
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Previous Month
Comments
How about changing the rules to "Git R Done!"
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
December 9, 2009 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm ripping out six 50 footers next week, but I don't think the City or remaining neighbors will give a hoot.
binky (anonymous profile)
December 9, 2009 at 1:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You go, binky! Always on the side of obeying the regs created by the progressives you so favor.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
December 9, 2009 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In my neighborhood, excessive pruning complaints usually come from homeowners who are being asked/coerced by uphill neighbors who want trees on the downhill property pruned to get better views. It can get pretty contentious!
We have some neighbors who occasionally threaten downhill neighbors with legal action while offering them cookies at the same time. This was especially true years ago when the city adopted the so-called "view ordinance" (which is really a set of guidelines for dispute resolution) and Diane Channing was organizing the Riviera Association.
One thing I learned, there are some tree pruning outfits who try hard to avoid damaging trees from over-pruning (e.g. Westree, the former Bill's Tree now owned by the very expensive Bartlett's). And then there are others who will cut off as much as the payer wants (e.g. Giant Beaver).
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
December 9, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is this myth that's been around for a while. It started during the pre-color era, before Santa Barbara was beautiful. We've all seen the black and white Santa Barbara. Photos of the Riviera portray a dull, dreary and drab mound of dirt and rock. But in reality it was always beautiful. So trees were imported, planted and naturalized to excess, unnecessarily destroying the natural environment and obliterating views, altering vistas. Tress are of course beautiful and beneficial but there are negatives as well. It is too bad we have excessively forested our urban area and created these conflicts with neighbors. But in this arid region we have created a frighteningly fire prone urban environment. But to this issue of excessive pruning or removal in private setbacks viewable by the public; shouldn't the public pay to have the trees maintained to public standards.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
December 9, 2009 at 6:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)