Saratoga council advances tree ordinance, renames ‘Zone 0’ and requires ember‑resistant perimeter for some removals

Saratoga — The City Council on Jan. 21 advanced an amendment to Article 15‑50 of the municipal code that substitutes the term "ember‑resistant zone" for the state‑referenced "Zone 0," narrows procedural protections for certain tree removals close to buildings and changes replacement‑tree requirements for development projects in the wildland‑urban interface (WUI).

Planning staffer Christina Fusco presented three changes she said are intended to help homeowners create defensible space and to reduce long‑term wildfire fuels: extending a five‑foot ember‑resistant buffer around structures beyond the WUI for homeowners who want it, waiving public notice and the right to appeal for trees whose trunks are within five feet of a building while still requiring permits and replacement trees, and replacing the value‑based replacement calculation for WUI development projects with a two‑trees‑for‑each‑removed‑tree rule (with a $300 in‑lieu fee option where planting space is unavailable).

Why it matters: The amendments respond to local wildfire concerns raised after the January 2025 Palisades fire and to homeowner insurance problems. Planning staff said the City’s existing tree‑permit rules remain in effect in most circumstances, but these changes create an explicit, narrow route for homeowners to create ember‑resistant defensible space near their houses and adjust how replacement plantings are counted for some development projects.

Councilmembers asked pointed questions about measurement and enforcement, the scope of the ember‑resistant requirement, and whether the rule would unintentionally reduce tree planting. Fusco said permits for removals within 5 feet would still require site visits and that switching to the 2:1 replacement rule for development projects would have reduced plantings citywide by about 30% based on last year’s projects.

Public safety and preservation tradeoffs: Anthony Fisher, a condominium owner, urged an additional safety exemption to allow removal of limbs that overhang occupied roofs even where trunks sit more than five feet away; staff replied that those situations fall under the regular tree‑permit process and can be addressed case‑by‑case. Several councilmembers urged retaining protections for the city’s tree canopy while enabling property owners to meet insurer defensible‑space requirements.

Council action and next steps: Councilmember Zhao moved, and the council seconded, to introduce and waive first reading of the amended ordinance as presented in a desk item that: replaces "Zone 0" with "ember‑resistant zone," defines that term, and makes creation of the ember‑resistant zone a condition of tree removal permits where applicable. The motion passed by voice vote. Staff and the planning commission will coordinate remaining wording and implementation details, including a potential follow‑up on whether ember‑resistant requirements should apply to accessory structures or entire properties.

What to expect: The desk‑item changes were advanced tonight; the council waived the first reading and instructed staff to return with final ordinance language and related administrative details, including a defined ember‑resistant standard and enforcement/inspection timing. The council indicated it may revisit any remaining scope questions with the planning commission before final adoption.