An edhat reader reports there are three Italian Stone Pine trees marked with a white “X” in the 300 block of Anapamu Street.
The City of Santa Barbara issued a statement last week that five trees, ranging in age from 96 and 116 years old, will be removed to protect public safety after a comprehensive assessment identified compromised root systems.
Many of the remaining trees will receive canopy pruning to reduce the risk of limb failure once neighboring trees are removed. Removals are expected to begin the week of June 3.
Between March 29 and March 30, two Italian stone pines on East Anapamu Street failed, and three required emergency removal due to the risk of imminent failure.
Related Articles
Pruning and Removal of Select Anapamu Street Italian Stone Pines to Begin Next Month
This is so totally wrong, A. and foremost: that the trees have not been properly cared for and that they needed the private/donation-funded -501c3 Pearl Chase Society to step forward with irrigators during the recent drought years (which were later removed and trashed without notice to the PCS);
B. that the tree division of the Parks Department, submerged with the Recreation department, apparently did not keep track of the trees’ health – and/or certainly did not share it with the HLC who has oversight of City Landmarks, as are these trees;
C. that the City decided to kill the trees/cut them down with a public notice sent by the marketing department — was it also sent to the Waterfront Dept to disseminate to the cruise ships? ….But not sent to the city residents….
AND finally, the HLC, trashed in a posting to Edhat’s FB page by a prior city Arborist, has been cut out of this process. (Perhaps not surprising since commissions, representatives of the interests of the people of SB, are sometimes considered thorns in the flesh of bureaucrats.)
We may not be able to save the Anapamu Stone Pines from Parks’ intended slaughter this week, but there’s an election coming up this fall for three council seats and next year for more, including the mayor. The Council hires (and fires) City department heads…. And in the meantime, there’s Wednesday’s HLC meeting at the David Gebhard Room on Garden Street/Cota. 1:30 p. m. for Public Comment for items not on the agenda.
Who speaks for the trees? There is a lot more to the sad story of these trees. Although the five-block stand is a designated City Historic Landmark that requires replacement when they are cut down or lost, the City has not fulfilled its responsibility to care for them over the years–or replace them. Back in 2013, community members who brought up their concerns about the alarmingly inadequate treatment of the stand were told to be patient, that the “Urban Forest Management Plan” would take are of all the many issues. Now, a decade later, without the kinds of proactive interventions and careful treatment this iconic stand of historic trees should have received, that plan–that requires much communication and proactivity– has been completely ignored. The historic trees are now in very bad shape due to “not so benign neglect.” Several members of the public have brought this to the attention of the Historic Landmarks Commission repeatedly for the past several months–and further circulated their comments to City ‘leadership.” At the HLC’s last meeting on May 22, the chairperson directed staff to put the issue on the agenda for its next meeting of June 5. It is not on the agenda that was posted yesterday, which means that the necessary historic input is not going to be heard before the Parks Department goes right ahead and clear-cuts the trees–probably before the June 5 meeting of the HLC at 1:30 at the David Gebhard Room. It’s probably too late to speak for those trees, but not too late to let the City know how much we care about them and to provide input about what should be done now.
Looks like a recall is in order.
HELP! This is outrageous! What can we do, we the public and we who have loved those trees? How can the Parks Department so ignore the HLC — and the public? Actually, they have more than simply ignored the HLC which has specific functions here: “A new historic structures ordinance was adopted in May 1977. It formally established the Committee’s powers and duties. A Charter Amendment approved by the voters in November 1993 established the Historic Landmarks Commission with authority within landmark districts and for designated landmarks among other entities. …”
AND Parks and Rec, what is its role? “Santa Barbara Parks and Recreation is your place for fun! In our 1,810 acres of parkland there is something for everyone” … Further into the Parks web site, “The Street Tree Advisory Committee was established by the Park Commission on December 20, 1979, to advise the Commission on tree removals and planting. …
To provide advice to the Parks and Recreation Department and Parks and Recreation Commission regarding planting and removing street trees, trees in front yard setbacks, and park and golf course trees.” These meetings, held early mornings at P&R headquarters are NOT televised and there is no known record of what was discussed, except what later comes before the full Commission. …To our knowledge, options have not been discussed at the monthly Parks Commission meetings with advance notices given via publicly accessible Agendas.
Was the Parks Commission “advised” by Parks director Zachary that the Anapamu Street trees would be removed and that others would be severely trimmed, now in late spring? Was this city-interest article on any agenda? The Brown Act requires 72-hours notice for a meeting agenda item — should there have been at least efforts made to bring the concerned public into the discussion?
What can we do? It’s been suggested that those who care for the trees and care for the process tie themselves to the Xed Stone Pines until Santa Barbarans are part of the process and we can work together for ways to protect the public … and the trees, too, not treating Anapamu as just a connection to Milpas Street.
To add insult to injury, the announcement about the plan to remove five more of these historic trees was made last month by a City “Marketing Coordinator.” in a press release sent to media outlets. Even ordinary street trees that even require a hearing and noticing before removal, but the HLC and the public have been completely left out of whatever process the Parks department used to make this decision to destroy these cherished landmarks without proper input or review.
How ironic, considering that A. Boyd Doremus, who planted those trees he raised from seedlings, was the first Parks superintendent of Santa Barbara. Now, we can’t get them to speak. much less give a full report on the health, care and replacement of the designated City Historic Landmark. Back in 2013, they did not ignore the request of the HLC commissioners, or the dogged stewardship of our beloved city watchdog, the late Kellam de Forest who was upset about the un-noticed removal of just one of those iconic trees. (His own parents wrote about those trees in the 1930s and 1940s in their magazine, “Santa Barbara Gardener.”)
In 2013, the city arborist came before the HLC and gave an accounting of the trees–the HLC members did not hold back in voicing their displeasure then about how the historic trees were being treated, and they issued a list of recommendations that were, sadly, never implemented.
Today, they won’t even bother. Members of the public can speak for two minutes about this un-agendized issue at public comment on Wednesday at 1:30 at 630 the HLC meeting or write their comments to HLCSecretary@SantaBarbaraCA.gov.
It seems that some kind of support for the trees could be erected to prevent them from falling, while also enabling them to regain their health.