MattersEnvironmentFirst seen Jan 10, 2022Last discussed Feb 7, 2023
Tree protection options
The report reviews Langford’s existing protection of sensitive ecosystems and considers whether additional tree-protection rules or policy changes are needed. It raises questions about how a new bylaw would complement current development permit protections and public consultation.
Where it stands: Tree protection report considered Jan 10, 2022; no decision is recorded in the supplied history.
Background
Earlier and later steps of the same initiative.
Timeline
Every time this matter appeared in council records, newest first.
- Mike Morton (Phelps Ave)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
Opposes the temporary tree bylaw, asks what studies informed it, and urges council to table adoption for a proper public hearing. - Joan Smurl (Lexton Road)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
Opposes the bylaw, citing steep penalties and inadequate fire-safety consideration, and asks for fire department guidance. - Dave Smurl (Luxton Road)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
Opposes restrictions on removing hazardous trees, citing storm damage and the need to protect property from fire and wind risks. - Mike Wignell (Selwyn Road)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
Opposes the bylaw as unfair to property owners and suggests limiting the number of trees that can be removed per property each year. - Renneth Lewey (Bellamy Road)Mixed · Committees and code of conduct
Supports committee structures and asks council to add social-media conduct rules that keep councillors accessible outside partisan pages. - Lisa Foxall (Players Drive)Opposes · Tree bylaw and code of conduct
Opposes the tree bylaw and asks for an open house, while requesting a social-media clause for councillors’ conduct. - Sienna Geary (Bear Mountain Parkway)Supports · Committees, code of conduct and tree bylaw
Supports the proposed committees, code of conduct, respectful workplace policy, and temporary tree bylaw. - Sandy Seifer (Walford Road)Opposes · Tree bylaw and code of conduct
Opposes the tree bylaw as punitive to homeowners and asks council to reconsider it; supports adding a social-media clause to the code of conduct. - Michael Sunshine (Langlista Drive)Supports · Committees, code of conduct and tree bylaw
Supports the proposed committees, code of conduct, and tree bylaw, citing respectful governance and the value of Langford’s tree canopy. - Wendy Hobbs (Luxon Road)Concerned · Committee structure and tree bylaw
Urges council to establish a dedicated protective services committee and raises concerns about unnecessary tree removal during development. - Corina Craig (Lakehurst Drive)Mixed · Committees, code of conduct and tree bylaw
Supports the temporary tree bylaw, asks for conflict-free board of variance members, and questions the draft code’s limits on council involvement in HR decisions. - Colton Weatherston (Christina Crescent)Supports · Tree protection bylaws
Supports the temporary tree bylaw and related bylaws, saying interim protection allows time for broad public input on a permanent policy. - Dave Saunders (Pears Road)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
Opposes the bylaw, citing conflicts with fire-safety guidance and impacts on residents who have maintained trees for decades. - A residentMixed · Tree bylaw, code of conduct and hookup fees
Criticizes the tree-bylaw process, supports limits on elected officials’ HR role, and asks council to lower hookup fees. - A resident (Rodney Road)Supports · Tree protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and asks for clearer details about arborist requirements, saying tree protection benefits the neighbourhood. - Nicholas Joel (Walford Place)Supports · Committee structure
Urges council to retain the current committee structure, consult existing members, and explain goals and selection criteria for any changes.
- Mike Morton (Phelps Ave)Opposes · Tree protection bylaw
- John AlexanderAsks · Tree-protection bylaws
Asks council to consult affected landowners before adopting the tree-protection bylaw, arguing rushed decisions create uncertainty for development. - Beth Solzgram (Walford Road)Concerned · Tree-protection bylaws and fines
Questions how tree cutting could be illegal without a bylaw and asks council to justify the proposed fines. - Wendy Hobbes (Luxton Road)Asks · Luxton Road work and Bray Road permits
Asks whether creek-work approvals are in place for Luxton Road stormwater work and when permits are required for the Bray Road development. - Rachel SansomAsks · Bray development
Seeks clarification that the Bray development will match the public-hearing presentation and can proceed to permitting. - Dora Stroud (Janine Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports adopting the tree-protection bylaws and notes that the Greater Victoria Climate Hub also supports them. - Elizabeth Campbell (Lakeside Place)Supports · Tree bylaw and urban-forest planning
Supports the tree bylaw and offers forest-science expertise to help with future urban-forest planning. - Bernadette Armstrong (Rodney Road)Mixed · Tree bylaw and Bray development
Supports the temporary tree bylaw and asks whether further discussion is possible on the Bray development amid nearby density concerns. - Kristen ArumSupports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports the tree-protection bylaws, saying public advocacy made the action feel responsive rather than unexpected. - Kim Robinson (Page Avenue)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports the tree bylaw and commends council and staff for acting quickly in response to public support. - Kara DoblockSupports · Urban forest plan and tree-protection bylaws
Praises the urban-forest-plan report and supports hiring a consultant and advancing the tree-protection bylaws. - Corina Craig (Lakehurst Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary tree bylaw and commends council and staff for responding to tree cutting while developing a permanent approach. - Carnal ChimaSupports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports the tree bylaws and the procedural review, saying swift action was necessary to meet a community need. - Michael Sunshine (Lang Vista Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the tree bylaw, arguing responsible property owners have little to fear, and welcomes future input on tree management. - Pete Kidge (East Spencer Road)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws and penalties
Supports both bylaws and argues penalties should deter harm to irreplaceable trees, including restrictions on future development applications. - Rennie Luberts (Sanehill Place)Mixed · Urban forest plan, tree bylaws and Latoria Road intersection
Supports the urban forest plan, tree bylaws and Latoria Road signals, and asks for clarification about sidewalks on the Klahani side. - Norman Joel (Walford Place)Concerned · Tree bylaw process and traffic signals
Criticizes the tree bylaw’s rushed, nontransparent process and asks council to consider a signal at Happy Valley School. - Tanya Sunshine (Lang Vista Drive)Mixed · Zoning fence rules and tree-protection bylaws
Supports the tree bylaws, asks for changes to zoning fence rules for public facilities, and urges attention to native and endangered species. - Patsy Hamilton (Granderson Road)Supports · Tree bylaw and urban forest management
Supports the temporary tree bylaw and the proposed urban forest management policy to protect residents and the natural environment. - Lisa Foxall (Players Drive)Opposes · Tree-protection bylaw process
Opposes the bylaw process as rushed and lacking public consultation, and asks about expert input, costs and the rationale for council’s action. - Mike Wignall (Sullivan Road)Mixed · Tree-protection bylaw scope and process
Appreciates the procedural redo but urges clear limits, fair penalties and stakeholder consultation to avoid burdening homeowners. - Nicholas Droll (Walford Place)Asks · Tree bylaw costs and process
Asks for details on legal and staff costs, when the bylaw was initiated, and whether direction was given publicly. - Sarah Plank (Goldstream Avenue)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports the bylaws, arguing election commitments and the urgency of preventing irreversible tree loss justify swift interim action. - Sienna (Langford Parkway)Asks · Tree-bylaw information access
Asks council to make information easier to access so residents can understand the bylaw and find answers without navigating older systems. - Devin Dignam (Reunion Avenue)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws
Supports council’s swift action to address a gap in existing protections and anticipates consultation on a permanent bylaw. - Scott Barry (Glen Lake Road)Opposes · Tree bylaw process and resident costs
Condemns the lack of notice and public input and asks whether council will compensate residents for costs caused by the bylaw. - Nithya Harris (Humpback Road) · Tree-protection bylaw and urban-tree benefits
Describes a 2021 urban-tree-canopy assessment that measured the benefits and functions provided by trees and forests.
- John AlexanderAsks · Tree-protection bylaws
- Mike Wignall (Lankford)Concerned · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
Criticizes the rushed public process and asks for resident consultation on the temporary tree bylaw. - Dora Stroud (Janine Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports temporary and permanent tree protections, citing trees’ ecological and community benefits and calling for substantial penalties. - Wendy Hobbs (Luxton Road)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the bylaw and asks council to consider buffer zones and consistent enforcement. - Siena Geary (Bear Mountain Parkway)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw in response to increased tree removal around the municipality. - Karina CraigSupports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and thanks council for transparent action and community consultation. - Michael Sunshine (Lang Vista Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports a temporary tree-cutting bylaw and a longer-term tree-management policy to protect Langford’s trees. - Tanya Sunshine (Lang Vista Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
Supports both bylaws, urges protection for native species, and calls for maximum per-tree penalties for violations. - Matt Rogers (Windman Lane)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and asks council to address tree protection in the development-permit process. - Sarah Plank (Goldstream Avenue)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and fines to deter tree removal while a permanent bylaw undergoes public consultation. - Lori Pomp (Winfield Terrace)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary measure and suggests using penalty revenue to help residents cover arborist costs. - Peter Ketch (Spencer Road)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports temporary and permanent protections and asks for tree-removal criteria that consider community quality of life and meaningful penalties. - Patsy Hamilton (Granderson Road)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports moving forward with a tree-protection bylaw to protect nearby mature trees. - Lisa Foxall (Players Drive)Opposes · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
Opposes advancing the bylaw without proper notice and consultation, citing potential effects on jobs, housing, investment, and the local economy. - Glenn Willing (Willing Drive)Mixed · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports a process for reviewing tree-cutting requests but urges stronger enforcement capacity and access to professional arborist advice. - Normal Joel (Walfred Place; Finney Road)Concerned · Tree-protection bylaw costs
Warns that arborist-report requirements and enforcement could impose substantial costs on property owners and taxpayers. - Sue Stroud (Janine Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and recommends an ongoing tree inventory to track canopy, tree health, and areas needing more trees. - Kristen Aram (Finlison Arm Road)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the emergency bylaw and maximum penalties to protect the urban canopy, wildlife habitat, and climate resilience. - Nicole Brown (Wendy Drive)Supports · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw and expects council to balance tree protection with the local economy. - Randy Luberts (Dane Hill Place)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
Supports both temporary bylaws and urges public involvement in developing permanent protections for environmental and personal-health benefits. - Nicholas Joel (Walford Place)Asks · Tree-protection bylaw costs
Asks who will pay for enforcement and arborist assessments, and whether the city will cover assessments for unsafe trees. - Colton Weatherson (Christina Crescent)Supports · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
Supports both bylaws as a temporary safeguard against tree cutting while a permanent policy is developed. - Kara Delbrook (Fashionables)Mixed · Tree-protection bylaw
Supports the temporary bylaw but urges thorough consultation, affordable exemptions for dangerous trees, and added protection for native species. - Erin Vandermaid (Greystone Place)Concerned · Permanent tree-protection bylaw
Urges a balanced permanent bylaw that protects trees without unduly restricting development or homeowners’ ability to address unsafe trees. - Bev Solstrom (Walford Road)Opposes · Tree-protection bylaw
Opposes the bylaw as rushed and insufficiently consulted, citing potentially unaffordable arborist assessments for homeowners. - David Drawnsfield (Pete Road)Mixed · Tree-protection bylaw and dangerous-tree exemptions
Supports tree cover but warns the bylaw could prevent necessary work to protect a home and property from a nearby hazardous tree. - Joel Leodakis (Page Avenue)Opposes · Tree-protection bylaw
Opposes the rushed bylaw, citing existing development-permit protections and concerns about costs, delays, consultation, and private property impacts.
- Mike Wignall (Lankford)Concerned · Tree-protection bylaws 2115 and 2116
- A resident (Phelps Avenue)Supports · Tree protection
Urges council to strengthen urban-tree protections and consult residents and professionals on a strategy suited to Langford. - A residentAsks · 2021 annual report
Asks staff to explain the financial-plan and actual developer-contribution figures and confirm whether the affordable-housing policy remains in force.
- A resident (Phelps Avenue)Supports · Tree protection
Staff review existing tree protections and possible bylaw changes
Information and possible direction regarding tree protection, Development Permit approaches, and potential tree bylaw implications.
- Mary Wagner (Deville Road)Mixed · Tree protection and construction noise
Supports a tree protection bylaw and opposes construction-noise permits, citing risks to trees and residents’ protection from noise. - A residentMixed · Construction noise, tree protection, and attainable housing
Requests public consultation, shorter construction hours, stronger tree protections, and attainable homes accessible to single-parent families. - A residentConcerned · Construction noise, tree protection, and Finney Road rezoning
Raises concerns about limited public consultation, construction-noise enforcement, tree removal, and the Finney Road rezoning. - A resident (Goldstream Avenue)Supports · Tree protection
Supports the staff report, arguing that development permit requirements adequately protect trees in Langford. - A resident (Ravensview Drive)Asks · Construction noise and attainable housing
Requests shorter construction hours, permits limited to exceptional circumstances, and public input on agenda reports. - A resident (Kingsview Ridge)Supports · Tree protection
Supports a dedicated tree protection bylaw and calls for public consultation and stronger action against deforestation. - A resident (Prospector Way)Concerned · Construction noise
Raises health impacts from construction noise and requests reduced hours, resident consultation, enforcement, and noise mitigation. - A resident (Ravensview Drive)Supports · Tree protection
Supports the staff report, arguing that development permit review adequately protects trees while allowing housing construction. - A resident (Goldstream Avenue)Supports · Attainable housing, construction noise, and tree protection
Supports attainable homeownership, proposed construction-noise amendments, and the existing development permit process for tree management. - A residentConcerned · Tree protection, construction noise, and Finney Road rezoning
Urges council to preserve trees and consider residents and future generations while addressing construction noise and Finney Road rezoning. - A residentSupports · Attainable housing, tree protection, and construction noise
Supports the city’s housing, tree-management, and construction-noise efforts, arguing that housing supply helps affordability. - M. WignallMixed · Construction noise and development
Supports continued development and requests only modest construction-noise adjustments to maintain good relationships with residents. - Mary Wagner (Deville Road)Opposes · Construction noise
Clarifies that Saturday blasting would expand current hours and asks for clear rules or removal of noise permits.
- Mary Wagner (Deville Road)Mixed · Tree protection and construction noise