Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Pasadena staff outlines implementation steps for newly adopted tree ordinance
Summary
City staff briefed the Natural Resources and Environmental Commission on changes to the city's recently adopted tree ordinance, describing new protected/restricted tree lists, clearer permit thresholds, strengthened oversight of city-owned removals, and replacement rules; commissioners raised transparency and replanting concerns and a Zoom commenter accused council members of unfairly altering protections.
Get email alerts on the Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The National Resources and Environmental Commission on Jan. 27 heard staff explain how South Pasadena will implement its recently adopted tree ordinance, including new lists for protected and restricted species, clarified permit thresholds and an increased role for administrative regulations.
Danielle, a public works water conservation management analyst, told commissioners the ordinance "has already been adopted by city council, so this is not necessarily a policy vote," and said staff's presentation focused on why the code was updated and how the city will operationalize it.
The presentation listed several substantive changes staff said were made after council and community input: reintroducing "significant trees" that require removal permits, classifying protected trees by species and diameter to reduce ambiguity, creating a restricted-tree list tied to fire-severity zones, establishing clear diameter thresholds for when trimming or removal permits are required, requiring independent certified-arborist review for city-owned tree removals, and consolidating replacement requirements into a single, easier-to-read section. For removals not associated with development staff said the standard is one replacement tree per removed tree; development-related removals use diameter-based replacement percentages and a minimum on-site planting requirement.
Staff described appeals and notice changes: appeals to this commission will be limited to applicants and the prior radius-based public-comment requirement was removed, which staff said was done to reduce administrative burden and address equity concerns. The ordinance will rely more on administrative regulations moving forward so staff can update technical guidance, tree lists and procedures without reopening the ordinance text.
Commissioners pressed staff on implementation details. One commissioner asked whether residents would be notified when the protected or restricted lists are updated; staff said the city will use communication channels including email newsletters, the South Pasadena Review and the city website and encouraged residents to contact public-works staff directly with questions. On removals in high fire-severity zones, staff explained two paths: a property owner can apply to remove a listed restricted species, or the fire department's annual inspection may identify properties that need defensible-space work and lead to a written determination from the fire chief (or designee) that supports a removal permit after arborist inspection.
During public comment a Zoom participant identified as Mister Gladding sharply criticized the update and associated materials, saying the presentation's claim of "stronger protection for large and ecologically valuable trees" was false and alleging council-level favoritism. "It's just one of many bullet points that is a blatant lie," he said, and named Mayor Pro Tem Omari Ferguson in alleging unequal treatment. Staff closed the comment when the speaker's allotted time expired; no formal response to the accusation appeared in the meeting record.
Commissioners recommended that staff consider some notice and transparency tools when implementation begins, such as a public log or map of tree removals on the city website (with attention to privacy and safety), and discussed longer-term urban-forest management work including GIS-based mapping and community-science contributions to help track canopy and species. Staff said the city anticipates budgeting work toward an urban-forest management plan in the next fiscal year and will continue to bring implementation materials and administrative regulations back to the commission for feedback.
The commission did not take formal action on the ordinance itself at the Jan. 27 meeting because the ordinance was previously adopted by city council. Staff said next steps include drafting administrative regulations, updating permit applications and replacement-tree lists, defining arborist-report standards, and preparing process flowcharts for trimming and removal permits.

