Does anyone know why SANTA CRUZ even has a heritage tree ordinance?

I think the ordinance has saved more trees than it has felled. Does anyone have info. or a link that shows how many "cut it down" requests have been denied vs. approved?

The city staff did their job and tried to protect the tree.
I wonder how much the tree killer contributed to our city council election campaigns.
Vote the bums out.

a tree existed before an apartment was built. an apartment was built and a driveway poured to surround the tree. Fast forward and the heritage tree kept growing and it's roots has caused some damage to the driveway that was built on top of it's roots and to a garage that was also built near it.

The property owner, who makes an income off the rental property from the apartments, wants to cut down the tree so as to increase his profits vs having to make periodic repairs due to the heritage tree. SC parks and rec noted the tree was a healthy heritage redwood and denied a permit to kill this beautiful living tree.

SC City Council on the other hand felt that commerce and profit is more important than community beauty, profit is more important than preserving our urban forest, individual maximized profit is more important than having a community that looks different that an asphalt jungle.

Why bother having a heritage tree ordinance? If old trees are near any development and any property owner can demonstrate that having the tree reduces their income or costs them money to maintain is a permissible justification for a permit to kill, why not just let people cut down whatever trees they want and not waste the public's time in writing letters thinking they actually have a say in the process, when clearly, they don't.

Repealing the heritage tree ordinance might bring some bad eco press to a city council that likes to posture itself as caring about the environment but why should they get good press when trees are so easily destroyed under the current ordinance?

SC City should either shore up its heritage tree ordinance so that it means that heritage trees are valued, otherwise just get rid of the heritage tree ordinance so we quit with any illusions of what is really valued by our so-called city leaders.

Don't attack the Heritage Ordinance.
Attack the council members who have no respect for the Ordinance or our beautiful trees.
Vote out the people who value profit over trees.

tree lover.

If you have evidence or proof that this city council is more hostile to saving heritage trees than previous groups, please post it.

Lyn Robinson is leaving and maybe Hilary Bryant is as well. But the rest who seem to vote consistently to kill healthy beautiful old heritage trees that provide us shade as well as beauty are :cynthia matthews, pamela comstock and David Terrazzas.

David Terrazzas announced he's running for re:election. If there is evidence that he and Hilary Bryant are hostile to preserving our heritage trees, I think that's important evidence to show the voters.

Some of us, unlike our current conservative block of city council members really like our urban forest and feel that preserving the things that make Santa Cruz special should be valued.


So anyone who have evidence to bear, like how many kill permits have been issued under this anti-tree SC City Council, please post!