Oak Bay Watch
Follow Us
  • Home
  • Issues
    • Trees Matter
    • OCP
    • Bylaws
    • Transparency
    • Urban Forest & Shoreline
    • Publications
  • Newsletters
  • Subscribe
  • Archive
  • Contact Us
  • NL - Is Oak Bay Protecting Our natural Assets?
                                       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)
 
  • 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
        zone, stop work orders
  • 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.