Community (Identified) Urban Forest Concerns:
The following concerns and suggestions were voiced by the Community at the May 2015 Urban Forest Meeting. The suggestions must be identified in a Planning Report, researched and if viable, prioritized and implemented.
Urban Forest Definition: "An urban forest includes all of a community's trees, shrubs, herbaceous low-growing perennial vegetation and soil. The urban forest is found on both public and private property including parks, street trees, open spaces, commercial space, residential and industrial lands".
Note: (All following resident quotations are from the May 2015 meeting referenced above)
The following concerns and suggestions were voiced by the Community at the May 2015 Urban Forest Meeting. The suggestions must be identified in a Planning Report, researched and if viable, prioritized and implemented.
Urban Forest Definition: "An urban forest includes all of a community's trees, shrubs, herbaceous low-growing perennial vegetation and soil. The urban forest is found on both public and private property including parks, street trees, open spaces, commercial space, residential and industrial lands".
Note: (All following resident quotations are from the May 2015 meeting referenced above)
- Give trees legal status approaching that of building setbacks
- Harmonization of urban forest strategy with development permits (and enforcement)
- Implementation of consistent tree protection bylaw
- Increase enforcement: control/ higher fines for developers + property owners
- Increase fines for tree bylaw infractions so they are not merely a "business expense"
- Lack of penalties for people who cut down trees
- Lack of protection for established trees on private property;
- Lack of public (and Council) understanding of what the Tree Protection Bylaw is and actually protects
- Loss of green space
- Loss of trees - especially mature trees - which can't be readily replaced
- Make it easier to put trees on the "significant" tree list
- Need to get better protection of existing trees
- New development lots damaging neighbour's tree roots, not respectful
- New development that clear cuts the lot
- New development that cuts the root system from trees on neighbours properties
- Private trees: increase fine schedules
- Protect backyard trees (roots, etc.)
- Size reduction for bylaw protection
- Stiff penalties for developers who take down trees Stiffer penalties Strong bylaws needed.
- Toothless tree protection bylaw
- Tree protection – when developing subdivision + monster homes
- Weak tree protection bylaw Protection:
- Encourage green space by enforcing a % ratio for lot back + sides Protection: Tougher conditions in tree protection bylaw: fines for individual trees, tree protection
- More tree less paving Protection:
- Protection of existing canopy: building footprint, replacement trees, penalties, densification
- Protect root systems when impacting development. We must preserve health of trees before development is allowed.
- Council favours developers over trees
- What is Council’s Tree Management Plan?
- Problems with denuding trees
- Developers and size of houses Developers have too much power over council Developers ought to preserve as much green space as possible (including trees) as a community benefit when applying for variances
- Developers try to build too many buildings and houses, so many trees are gone
- How much infill do we have left? Was used as a mortgage helper in the last 40 years?
- If garage requires removal of a large tree neighbours should be notified
- Increase replacement tree ratio for development losses - 2 for 1 not enough - no exceptions for building envelope exemptions.
- Infill takes a hit on private trees Lot infill at the expense of tree canopy
- Make the urban forest Oak Bay's municipal focus (like Uplands) versus balance any further development
- New buyers priority should be to keep the urban forest, not subdivision for profit.
- Council is our agent. ???
- New developers denude/ damage
- Putting houses/buildings before trees
- Restrict lot coverage to protect space for trees Strategy for developers: first 16 trees, then 8, then 4; then council agrees (conditioning response).
- The direct negative impact of developers on existing trees, especially large older trees such as Garry oaks
- Tighten development process
- Transparency - acquiring information on development through FOI takes too long and trees are down before receiving it.
- Protection vs Densification
- Lack of public awareness as to significance + important role of trees.
- Should a dollar value be calculated on our trees to help the public value trees as well as structures?
- The management and protection of Oak Bay's streetscape when considering future development
- Trees as asset for the community (financial asset)
- Embrace trees for future generations
- Tree monitoring
- Apparent lack of coordination with Tree Protection Bylaw enforcement and council and staff
- Coordination/ duplication of effort - public and private (e.g. for inventory) Harmonize bylaws
- Municipal departments harmonization Tree protection - harmonize bylaws
- A full time bylaw officer who is able to fine people breaking the tree bylaw
- Adequate funding for natural areas
- Annual funding for protected trees
- Endowment funds (tree funds): can be required for proper repair and maintenance of buildings that densify a site in exchange for a community benefit such as heritage + green space preservation. This would make it more difficult to apply for subdivision Municipal subsidy for planting trees on private lands.
