Residents and environmental attorney urge Burbank council to accept settlement over Niagara Street tree removals

Diane McKinnon, a Niagara Street resident, told the Burbank City Council on Jan. 28, 2025, that residents have been “advocating tirelessly for our trees” after a removal project she said was approved without resident input. She said a judge confirmed the city was not in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and that an injunction forced the city to complete environmental review.

The issue surfaced during the public comment period immediately before the council’s closed session. McKinnon said the dispute has taken a financial and emotional toll on residents, noting many are elderly or absent for long periods because of work in film and television and asking the city to “work together with residents to ensure the survival of these trees.”

Her husband, James McKinnon, said hundreds of trees of many species fell during a recent rainstorm and said Niagara Street residents alone were being targeted in the removal project. “We really want the City to care about the environment and how their decisions affect the residents,” he said.

Jamie Hall, who identified himself as a land use and environmental attorney representing Guardians of the Pines, urged the council to accept a settlement offer his client presented. Hall said he would not disclose confidential terms in public comment but described the proposal in broad terms: it would provide measures designed to ensure trees survive to maturity, require replacement of lost canopy, and include “enhanced mitigation measures to reduce impact of both residents and wildlife.”

Hall said settling would avoid further litigation over the adequacy of the city’s mitigated negative declaration and the expense of preparing a full environmental impact report. “The city does have liability already because the court determined that the city failed to undertake environmental analysis before approving the project,” he told the council.

No formal action or vote on the settlement was recorded in the televised portion of the meeting; Hall said details and negotiations would be addressed in closed session. The council adjourned to closed session after the public comment period.

Why it matters: The residents’ comments highlight a pending legal dispute and a proposed settlement that, if accepted, would alter how the city mitigates tree loss on Niagara Street and could avoid the cost and time of additional litigation or an environmental impact report.

Context and limits: Speakers said the settlement’s specific terms are confidential and that the council would discuss the item in closed session. Statements in this report are limited to what speakers revealed publicly during the meeting and do not describe any council decision, which was not recorded in the public portion of the session.