Tree canopy is a great example - most of our tree canopy
is on private SF lots. If we are going to allow much of these
lots to be paved for parking, we might need to develop
a parkland acquisition policy /plan so we don't rely so
much on private lots. Lots of ways to improve things.

When we largely adopted the provincial guidelines verbatim, staff told us not to spend too
much time on them because they said there would be very little to no uptake. Now that we've seen a number, it's a good time to see if they are working or could be improved.

I never said there were too many or that I would like to see fewer. Many of the applications were waiting until we approved our new parking bylaw, which took staff far too long to complete and I'm on the record as saying it's not aggressive enough.

We hear a lot about potential impacts of SSMUH from residents, without a lot of facts inserted into the discussion. Most of the ones we've seen also far are good, but there is room to tweak it and improve it. I have no interest in making it harder - just clearer for residents and developers alike.

wow Leo. Not only did the TC misrepresent my motion, but you didn't even bother to check in and ask. For the record one of the main developers of SSMUH projects (about 50%) in Esquimalt spoke at the end of the meeting in favour of the review. But facts don't matter I guess.

Hey Chris- how are your utility parcel taxes listed on your property tax bills? Are they separate line items or bundled up into your main municipal tax line item?

We use an originally-from-Canada Kobo e-reader, and it integrates with Canadian Libraries. Enjoy it a lot more than I expected to.

Thanks! Still trying to come up with a witty debut post.

And yet somehow Esquimalt ended up at #134 on their list. Wonder what would happen to Victoria's ranking if they combined Esquimalt with Esquimalt East (Vic West) and re-ran the numbers. :)

except there is agreement that Esquimalt is the New Westminster of the CRD (even confirmed by @pjnewwest.bsky.social )