Santa Cruz to begin work on heritage tree regulation changes
SANTA CRUZ - The city of Santa Cruz is in the early stages of changing certain regulations around the removal of heritage trees and shrubs, a move that has attracted decadeslong controversy. Though the city already has a jumping-off point, there are still plenty of unknowns.
The city's current ordinance governing the removal of heritage trees and shrubs is, according to city staff, unenforceable. State law changed in 2020 to require objective standards for the removal of heritage trees when developing housing. These objective standards, by the state's definition, must have a common and universally known metric by which to measure the standard.
One part of the city's ordinance states that heritage trees or shrubs may be removed if the project's design can't be changed to accommodate the plants. This standard is subjective and could be interpreted in multiple ways, meaning it cannot be enforced, said Clara Stanger, senior planner with the city of Santa Cruz.
In March, the Santa Cruz City Council directed staff to work on a new heritage tree ordinance to apply to housing developments citywide. Over the course of the next few months, city staff will gather community feedback and do research to develop a draft ordinance. There is actually already a foundation to work on, as updated heritage tree regulations are one component of a separate project to streamline permitting processes for 100% affordable housing.
This project, called the Affordable Housing Ministerial Approval Overlay District, has itself proven controversial, in part because it would eliminate public hearing requirements for some housing developments. A portion of the proposal includes new heritage tree regulations for 100% affordable housing developments in the overlay district.
The draft regulations will require project developers to hire a certified arborist with a professional accreditation. The arborist will identify all heritage trees within a certain distance of the site work, including those on properties adjacent to the development. The arborist would then evaluate those trees, determining whether they are healthy and how ground disturbing work, including construction and drainage, would affect the plants.
With the draft regulations, removal of heritage trees and shrubs would only be allowed if the tree was within a certain radius of site work, and if the arborist determined that protection measures could not preserve the tree. Trees on adjacent properties could not be removed without permission of the property owner.
If any trees needed to be removed, a bird nesting survey during the nesting season would need to be conducted. Developers would also be required to replace trees with either two 24-inch box trees or six 15-gallon climate appropriate trees, a policy that is stricter than the currently citywide replacement policy and consistent with replacement requirements in the coastal zone. The city would require three years of monitoring and maintenance for those replacement trees.
If the project arborist were to determine that there is no space for replacement trees, the developer would pay a replacement fee that would go into the city's tree fund.
It's possible that the heritage tree regulations for the overlay district will evolve in response to community feedback and research in the coming months. The policy for the 100% affordable housing overlay district may or may not end up matching the citywide policy.
Staff are exploring several possibilities for the updated regulations, including incentives for retaining heritage trees and different standards for certain species or sizes of trees. That research is still in its early phases, Stanger said, so city staff are not yet sure what will be possible.
The proposed regulations for the overlay district are not without controversy. Some opponents, including longtime heritage tree activist and former Santa Cruz mayoral candidate Gillian Greensite, argue that the current regulations are objective and enforceable, and should be kept. Stanger said that the disagreement itself is proof that the regulation is subjective.
"If different people can have different opinions about whether or not a standard is subjective or objective, then that means the standard is subjective," Stanger said.
The current heritage tree removal ordinance was adopted by the City Council in 1998. The city tried to change the ordinance in 2013, adding new reasons for property owners to petition for the removal of heritage trees. Those changes were taken to court by an advocacy group called Save Our Big Trees, which Greensite was involved with. The group argued that the city did not conduct a thorough environmental review before making the changes. After a Santa Cruz County judge ruled in favor of the city, Save Our Big Trees appealed the case. The 6th District Court of Appeals sided with the advocacy group in 2015, and heritage tree regulations have not changed since, Stanger said.
Now, the city is responding to state law changes that did away with subjective standards for tree removal when it comes to housing developments.
The goal of tree protection ordinances, said Leslie Keedy, urban forester with the city of Santa Cruz, is to protect tree canopy, maintain environmental balance, enhance urban aesthetics and protect natural resources. Tree canopy has several benefits in urban areas, including cooler temperatures and carbon sequestration.
"Trees and our urban forests are really important to Santa Cruz, and they align with our environmental values," Stanger said. "That's why we're trying to work on our end to make something that is better than what we have now."
Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.
This story was originally published July 15, 2026 at 5:07 PM.