Parks commission approves removal of 90-foot Canary Island pine; denies multiple other street-tree removal requests

The Santa Barbara Parks and Recreation Commission on March 26 approved the removal of a large Canary Island pine at 1935 East Las Tunas Road, citing structural concerns and the tree’s proximity to a high-voltage line, while denying or deferring a series of other removal requests after hearing staff reports, applicant testimony and an outside arborist assessment.

Commissioners said the Las Tunas tree — described by staff as “probably all of 90 feet” — posed a safety risk because three long, co‑dominant stems above a historical topping wound were weakly attached and created a long lever arm toward power lines. Brett Volpe, the city’s street tree supervisor, told the commission the Street Tree Advisory Committee had inspected the site and recommended removal, saying “the principles of good forest management would be upheld by that decision.”

Why it matters: the commission repeatedly balanced immediate public‑safety concerns, private‑property impacts and the city’s broader urban‑forest goals. Several applicants argued roots and repeated sidewalk or foundation repairs justified removal, while commissioners and staff urged mitigation, replacement planting or further coordination with public‑works crews.

Votes at a glance: - 1935 East Las Tunas Road (Canary Island pine): approved for removal (motion approved). - 1459 Crestline Drive (two Indian laurel fig, Ficus microcarpa): removal denied (motion approved to deny). - 953 Roble Lane (Coast live oak, Quercus agrifolia): denial without prejudice (applicant may reapply without fee; motion approved). - 409 East Valerio Street (four liquid‑amber / sweetgum in front setback): removal denied with prejudice (motion approved). - 325 Argonne Circle (three Mexican fan palms, Washingtonia robusta): removal denied (motion approved). - 92 Skyline Circle (Monterey pine, Pinus radiata): removal denied (motion approved).

1935 East Las Tunas Road Staff described the tree as structurally compromised by three long, co‑dominant stems and close enough to high‑voltage lines to raise “reasonable concern.” The Street Tree Advisory Committee recommended removal; commissioners voted to follow that recommendation. Volpe noted Southern California Edison had been involved and offered removal in this case.

1459 Crestline Drive Applicants argued the Indian laurel figs had repeatedly damaged hardscape and presented tripping hazards; owner Ed Farrell told the commission he submitted a petition signed by 14 neighbors and cited Santa Barbara Municipal Code section 15.24 0.09 (as referenced in his materials) to support removal. The Street Tree Advisory Committee found the trees healthy and recommended denial; commissioners denied the removals, noting previous denials for similar trees and pointing to ongoing or planned public‑works hardscape work as an alternative to removal. Commissioners asked staff to follow up with Public Works and the applicant and noted that appeals of commission decisions may be filed with City Council within 10 days.

953 Roble Lane Owner Anthony Luna submitted a Level‑3 risk assessment by board‑certified arborist Kenneth Knight that documented interior decay and a hollow trunk and concluded a “moderate” risk of failure within one year and recommended removal. Knight’s report and Luna’s testimony that he had faced insurance non‑renewal prompted extended discussion. The Street Tree Advisory Committee recommended denial; the commission voted to deny without prejudice to allow the applicant to reapply (no fee) if conditions worsen or if additional documentation is provided. Staff said it would follow up with the applicant and Public Works and provide the commission with updates.

409 East Valerio Street Applicants cited repeated grade changes from root development, prior flooding of a crawl space and foundation/moisture concerns. Staff reported the committee found the trees healthy and recommended denying the removal; the commission voted to deny the request (motion carried and recorded as denial with prejudice), while noting plumbing or drainage repairs and the age of cast‑iron lateral lines as separate infrastructure matters.

Other items The commission also denied removal requests for three Mexican fan palms at 325 Argonne Circle and a Monterey pine at 92 Skyline Circle after on‑site inspection and committee review, with staff describing those trees as generally healthy.

What commissioners requested Several commissioners asked staff to verify whether pending public‑works contracts include sidewalk and curb repairs at locations where removal requests were tied to hardscape damage. Vice Chair Clark and others pressed for a clearer replacement‑tree plan when removals are approved and for staff follow‑up on applicants’ safety concerns. Commissioners also noted the city’s need to balance carbon sequestration and canopy loss against immediate safety and accessibility concerns.

Community next steps Staff said they would notify applicants of appeal rights, follow up with Public Works on sidewalk/curb bids, and provide commission updates when additional information (for example, engineering or construction contracts) becomes available. Applicants may file appeals to City Council within 10 days of the commission’s action.

Ending: The commission’s decisions reflected a case‑by‑case approach — prioritizing imminent safety where evidence supported removal while leaning toward mitigation, replacement planting and further coordination with public works for disagreements rooted in hardscape or infrastructure problems.