[PDF]

Council Agenda and Minutes PDF Free Download

1 / 132
0 views•132 pages

Council Agenda and Minutes PDF Free Download

Council Agenda and Minutes PDF free Download. Think more deeply and widely.

Council Agenda
Monday, December 15, 2025, 7:00 PM
Council Chambers & Electronic Meeting
Electronic Meeting Instructions
To Join a Meeting:
Log into Zoom.us or the Zoom app on your device.
Enter the Meeting ID: 897 0956 7061
Dial In: 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free) or 1-778-907-2071 Meeting ID: 897 0956 7061
To Participate: During the public participation period, press Star (*) 9 to "raise your hand".
Participants will be unmuted one by one when it is their turn to speak.
When called upon, you will have to press *6 to unmute the phone from your side as well.
We may experience a delay in opening the meeting due to technical difficulties. In the event that the meeting does
not start as scheduled please be patient and stay on the line, we will get started as quickly as possible.
Public Dial-In Details are also posted at Council & Committee Meetings - City of Langford
Pages
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
3. MEETING CONDUCT RULES
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
5. PRESENTATIONS
5.1 On and Off Street Parking - Watt Consulting (Approx. 1hr)
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
7. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
7.1 Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
3
8. NOTICES OF INTENT
8.1 TUP25-0003 and DVP25-0003 - 116-832 McCallum Road
9
8.2 TUP25-0004 - 101-945 Reunion Avenue (Original Farm)
15
8.3 TUP25-0005 and DVP25-0005 - 933 Tayberry Terrace
21
8.4 DVP25-0001 - 932 Rowils Crescent
27
9. REPORTS
9.1 Parking Bylaw Modernization and Downtown On-Street Parking Strategy
29
9.2 Options for Better Waste Management
56
10. CORRESPONDENCE
10.1 West Shore Parks & Recreation Society - Request for 2026 Owner Representative
Appointment (Mayoral)
99
11. NOTICE OF MOTION
12. BYLAWS
12.1 BYLAW NO. 2257
100
“City of Langford Housing Agreement (2772 Vantilburg Crescent), Bylaw No. 2257,
2025". (ADOPTION)
12.2 BYLAW NO. 2261 (Background report attached)
112
"City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Amendment No. 1, Bylaw
No. 2261, 2025". (ADOPTION)
12.3 BYLAW NO. 2264
115
"City of Langford Housing Agreement (814 Hockley Avenue) Bylaw No. 2264, 2025".
(ADOPTION)
13. ADJOURNMENT
Page 2 of 132
1
Council Minutes
December 1, 2025, 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers & Electronic Meeting
PRESENT:
Mayor S. Goodmanson
Councillor K. Guiry
Councillor C. Harder
Councillor L. Szpak
Councillor M. Wagner
Councillor K. Yacucha - Remote
ABSENT:
Councillor M. Morley
ATTENDING:
D. Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Officer
B. Hutchins, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
M. Dillabaugh, Director of Finance
K. Balzer, Director of Engineering and Public Works
Y. Nielsen, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities
K. Dube, Senior Manager of Information Technology and GIS
D. Petrie, Senior Manager of Business Development and Events
L. Fletcher, Manager of Community Safety and Municipal Enforcement
M. Miles, Manager of Legislative Services
M. Treleaven, Parks Planning and Research Coordinator
T. Booth, GIS Lead
B. Boisvert, Legislative Services Administrative Coordinator
Meeting available by teleconference.
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Goodmanson called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm.
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councillor Harder read the City of Langford's Territorial Acknowledgment.
3. MEETING CONDUCT RULES
M. Miles, Manager of Legislative Services, read the City of Langford's meeting conduct rules.
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
MOVED BY: GUIRY
SECONDED: WAGNER
THAT Council approve the agenda as presented.
Page 3 of 132
Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
2
Motion CARRIED.
5. PRESENTATIONS
5.1 Parks Master Plan (Approx. 1hr)
Justin Ellis, RC Strategies presented the Parks Master Plan outline to Council.
Councillor Yacucha left the meeting at 8:09 pm.
Councillor Yacucha returned to the meeting remotely at 8:29 pm.
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Mayor Goodmanson opened public participation at 8:30 pm.
P. Hamilton, Langford Resident - re: Item 9.1.1 - The speaker inquired about the bylaw
regulations regarding mobility devices travelling in a bike lane. The speaker expressed concern
regarding the condition of a few sidewalks in the City.
H. Bloomenthal, Colwood Resident - re: Item 11.1 - The speaker expressed concern regarding a
potential increase to the fees and charges at the City Centre Park recreation center.
W. Hobbs, Langford Resident - re: Item 11.1 - The speaker expressed concern regarding a
potential increase to the fees and charges at the City Centre Park recreation center. re: Item 10.1
- The speaker expressed concern regarding approving Financial Plan items prior to the Financial
Plan being presented to Council.
W. Bowers, Langford Resident - re: Item 6 - The speaker expressed concern regarding the public
participation process at Council meetings.
K. Grainger, Colwood Resident - re: Item 11.1 - The speaker expressed concern regarding a
potential increase to the fees and charges at the City Centre Park recreation center.
L. Foxall, Langford Resident - re: Item 10.1 - The speaker expressed concern regarding the cost of
the project. 10.2 - The speaker expressed concern regarding the cost of the project. re: Item 11.1
- The speaker expressed concern regarding a potential increase to the fees and charges at the
City Centre Park recreation center. re: Item 11.5 - The speaker expressed concern regarding the
road closure.
L. McNeely, Langford Resident - re: Item 5.1 - The speaker expressed support for the Parks
Master Plan. The speaker requested that grief supportive and contemplative spaces be
considered during future park design.
N. Johal, Langford Resident - re: Item 5.1 - The speaker inquired about the cost of the consultant.
The speaker expressed concern regarding environmental due diligence when purchasing
property to be used as parks. re: Item 10.2 - The speaker expressed concern regarding the
ownership of the proposed RCMP building.
B. Hill, Langford Resident - re: Item 10.2 - The speaker encouraged Council to support the
proposed RCMP building. re: Item 11.1 - The speaker expressed concern regarding a potential
increase to the fees and charges at the City Centre Park recreation center.
Page 4 of 132
Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
3
Council made a motion at 9:00 pm to extend the public participation for all first-time speakers.
Please see the vote below.
N. Lehman, Langford Resident - re: Item 10.1 - The speaker suggested that the City consider
widening the shoulders on Fairway Avenue.
Mayor Goodmanson closed public participation at 9:03 pm.
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: SZPAK
THAT Council at 9:00 pm extend public participation for first time speakers.
Motion CARRIED.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: GUIRY
THAT Council adopt the recommendations for each item of the Consent Agenda as presented.
Minutes of the West Shore Parks and Recreation Society Board of Directors Meeting -
October 9, 2025 (RECEIVE)
Minutes of the Council Meeting - November 17, 2025 (ADOPT)
Draft Minutes of the Community Advisory Committee Meeting - November 25, 2025
(RECEIVE)
Motion CARRIED.
8. CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
None were removed.
9. COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS
9.1 Community Advisory Committee Meeting Resolutions - November 25, 2025
9.1.1 Bylaw No. 2233 - Streets and Traffic Bylaw
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
1. THAT Council approve the addition of the word "separated" before "bicycle
lane or" and the addition of the word "paved" before "multi-use pathway" in
section 22(2)(a) of the proposed Street and Traffic Bylaw No. 2233, 2025;
AND
2. THAT Council consider giving first, second and third readings to City of
Langford Streets and Traffic Bylaw No. 2233, 2025;
AND
3. THAT Council consider giving first, second and third readings to Streets and
Traffic Miscellaneous Amending Bylaw No. 2181, 2025.
Page 5 of 132
Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
4
Motion CARRIED.
10. REPORTS
10.1 Veterans Memorial Park Expansion – Early Budget Approval
MOVED BY: SZPAK
SECONDED: WAGNER
THAT Council direct staff to include the Veterans Memorial Park Expansion in the 2026
Capital Budget in the 2026 – 2030 Five Year Financial Plan and authorize staff to proceed
with tendering the project.
Motion CARRIED.
10.2 West Shore RCMP Detachment Expansion Municipal Consent for Bylaw Nos. 4692 &
4693
MOVED BY: WAGNER
SECONDED: SZPAK
THAT Council consent to the Capital Regional District Board adopting Bylaw No. 4692
“West Shore RCMP Detachment Expansion Service Establishing Bylaw No. 1, 2025” and
Bylaw No. 4693, “West Shore RCMP Detachment Expansion Loan Authorization Bylaw
No. 1, 2025”.
Motion CARRIED.
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
THAT Council at 10:02 pm extend the meeting until 11:00 pm.
Motion CARRIED.
11. BYLAWS
11.1 BYLAW NO. 2182
"City Centre Park Fees & Charges Bylaw No. 1203, Amendment No. 2, Bylaw No. 2182,
2025”. (ADOPTION)
MOVED BY: SZPAK
SECONDED: YACUCHA
THAT Council adopt "City Centre Park Fees and Charges Bylaw No. 1203, Amendment
No. 2, Bylaw No. 2182, 2025".
Motion CARRIED.
11.2 BYLAW NO. 2233
"Streets and Traffic Bylaw No. 2233, 2025". (FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS)
Page 6 of 132
Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
5
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
THAT Council give "City of Langford Streets and Traffic Bylaw No. 2233, 2025", first,
second and third readings.
Motion CARRIED.
11.3 BYLAW NO. 2181
“Streets and Traffic Miscellaneous Amending Bylaw, No. 2181, 2025". (FIRST, SECOND
AND THIRD READINGS)
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
THAT Council give "Streets and Traffic Miscellaneous Amending Bylaw No. 2181, 2025",
first, second and third readings.
Motion CARRIED.
11.4 BYLAW NO. 2257 (Background report attached)
“City of Langford Housing Agreement (2772 Vantilburg Crescent), Bylaw No. 2257,
2025". (FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS)
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: GUIRY
THAT Council give "City of Langford Housing Agreement (2772 Vantilburg Crescent),
Bylaw No. 2257, 2025", first, second and third readings.
Motion CARRIED.
11.5 BYLAW NO. 2258 (Background report attached)
"Road Closure Bylaw No. 2258 (a portion of Hockley Avenue), 2025”. (ADOPTION)
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
That Council adopt "Road Closure Bylaw No. 2258, 2025 (848 Hockley Ave)".
Motion CARRIED.
11.6 BYLAW NO. 2261 (Background report attached)
"City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Amendment No. 1, Bylaw No.
2261, 2025". (FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS)
MOVED BY: HARDER
SECONDED: WAGNER
That Council give "City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Amendment
No. 1, Bylaw No. 2261, 2025", first, second and third readings.
Motion CARRIED.
Page 7 of 132
Minutes of the Council Meeting - December 1, 2025
6
11.7 BYLAW NO. 2264 (Background report attached)
"City of Langford Housing Agreement (814 Hockley Avenue) Bylaw No. 2264, 2025".
(FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS)
MOVED BY: WAGNER
SECONDED: HARDER
THAT Council give "City of Langford Housing Agreement (814 Hockley Avenue) Bylaw No.
2264, 2025", first, second and third readings.
Motion CARRIED.
12. ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY: GUIRY
SECONDED: HARDER
THAT Council adjourn the meeting.
Mayor Goodmanson adjourned the meeting at 10:24 pm.
Motion CARRIED.
Presiding Council Member
Certified Correct - Corporate Officer
Page 8 of 132
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LANGFORD
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
TUP25-0003 – 116-832 McCallum Road
That Temporary Use Permit No. TUP25-0003 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford to
Ahura
Yurchenko to operate a bakery at 116-832 McCallum Road, pursuant to section 493 of the Local
Government Act
, and subject to the following:
1. Conditions
The following requirements be imposed pursuant to section 493 of the Local Government Act:
a) That the Temporary Use Permit be issued or a period of three years;
b)
That the operator of the business obtain approval from the Building Department for Tenant
Improvements;
c) That the operator of the business obtain a Business License from the City; and
d) That the Temporary Use Permit may not be renewed if off-
street parking becomes a problem
due to the bakery use.
Page 9 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeƟng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
InformaƟon on how to parƟcipate in this meeƟng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
MeeƟng ID #897 0956 7061
File Nos: TUP25-0003 and DVP25-0003
LocaƟon: 116-832 McCallum Road, as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: Mixed Use Employment (MUE2)
Purpose: ApplicaƟon to allow for the temporary use of a bakery and to vary the
required parking for the bakery.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noƟces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeƟng.
Ask QuesƟons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit QuesƟons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your first iniƟal, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submiƩed to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeƟng.
Speak at the MeeƟng: You may speak during the “Public ParƟcipaƟon” secƟon of
the meeƟng. ParƟcipaƟon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaƟon.
Watch the MeeƟng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
o
rt:
e report
w
w
il
il
l
l
bebe
be
a
a
vava
v
ilil
ab
ab
ab
e
ere
Langford.ca
no
Ɵ
ces
o
nce
t
t
he
he
he
a
a
a
gege
ge
nd
nd
n
a is
p
p
os
te
e
d to t
h
e we
b
be
be
be
fofo
fo
re
re
r
t
t
t
he
h
m
m
m
eeee
ee
Ɵn
Ɵn
Ɵn
g.
g.
g.
or
Em
Em
ai
ai
l:l:
pl
pl
pl
anan
a
nini
ni
ng
ng
ng
@l
@l
@l
an
an
an
gfgf
oror
d
d.
d
ca
ca
on
s:
MaMa
Ma
il
il
il
:
:
:
Ci
Ci
Ci
tyty
ty
o
o
o
f
f
La
ng
ng
n
fofo
fo
rd
rd
YoYo
Yo
uu
m
mumu
stst
i
i
nc
nc
lulu
de
de
y
y
ou
ou
r
r
fir
fir
fi
stst
s
i
i
ni
ni
ni
ƟaƟa
l,
l,
l
l
l
a
as
t
t
na
n
me,
re
re
si
si
s
de
de
ncnc
e.e.
e
CoCo
Co
rrrr
r
eses
es
popo
po
ndnd
nd
en
en
n
ce
ce
m
m
ay
a
b
b
e
e
susu
su
b
bm
iƩ
e
no
te
te
te
d
d
d
ab
ab
ov
ov
ov
e
e
e
an
an
an
d
d
d
wi
wi
w
ll
ll
ll
b
b
b
e
e
e
ci
ci
rc
c
ulul
at
a
a
ed
d
t
t
o
o
o
Co
Co
C
u
n
ci
me
me
e
eƟ
eƟ
eƟ
ngng
n
.
.
M
ee
Ɵn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
g:
g
g
g
g
g
g:
g
YoYo
u
u
ma
ma
y
y
spsp
p
ea
ea
k
k
du
du
ri
ri
n
ng
t
t
he
he
“
PuPu
bl
bl
b
ic
P
P
P
ar
ar
Ɵc
ip
aƟ
o
th
th
th
e e
meme
me
eƟ
eƟ
eƟ
ng
ng
g
.
P
P
ar
r
Ɵc
Ɵc
Ɵ
ip
ip
i
aƟ
aƟ
Ɵ
onon
n
i
i
s
s
byby
b
p
p
ho
ho
ho
ne
n
n
or vi
a
pepe
p
rsrs
rs
o
on
n
—
—
—
se
se
e
e
e
e
th
th
e
e
we
we
e
bsbs
s
it
it
it
e
e
e
fofo
f
r
r
r
momo
mo
rere
i
i
i
nf
nf
nf
or
o
o
m
a
Ɵ
o
eƟ
ng
ng
ng
ng
g
ng
ng
ng
:
:
:
:
:
ViVi
Vi
ew
ew
w
i
i
n
n
thth
th
e e
e
Zo
Zo
Zo
omom
o
a
a
pppp
pp
,
,
or
or
or
ww
w
at
at
ch
ch
ch
t
he
he
r
r
r
ec
ec
c
oror
di
d
n
Page 10 of 132
0123456789ÿ087557ÿÿ !" #$%ÿ&'()*ÿ+%ÿ,-,.
/012340567ÿ95:;<ÿ=54>?4ÿ@40:A7ÿB3>?ÿ@C70:?77ÿD?5;?4ÿ3Eÿ2B?ÿ<?54ÿ5F54;
GH4I83HJHÿK1J47L8
MNOPQRNSÿUVPRUWRUVUXRÿYSVZ[ÿ\SR]URÿ^S_ÿ
RUOUVP`[ÿS^SRZUZÿPaUÿPNP`UÿbX_NVU__ÿcUSZURÿ
QdÿPaUÿeUSRÿSPÿPaUÿfSVSZNSVÿgX UURÿ
faS]hURÿQdÿfQ]]UROUi_ÿjfgffkl
fgffi_ÿmnPaÿSVVXS`ÿb`SOoÿpÿqaNPUÿ
rS`SÿbX_NVU__ÿs^SRZ_ÿ^URUÿaU`ZÿNVÿ
tQRQVPQÿQVÿuQvlÿmwlÿtaUÿfgffÿ
bX_NVU__ÿcUSZUR_aNWÿs^SRZ_ÿOU`Ux
hRSPUÿPRSN`h`SyUR_ÿZRNvNVzÿNVO`X_NQV{ÿ
NVVQvSPNQV{ÿSVZÿzRQ^PaÿNVÿfSVSZSi_ÿ
|}crbtg~ÿhX_NVU__ÿOQ]]XVNP[l
\SR]URÿN_ÿPaUÿOXRRUVPÿWRU_NZUVPÿSVZÿ
fÿQdÿsOOUVPÿ~VV_{ÿWRQXZ`[ÿQ^VUZÿ
SVZÿQWURSPUZÿh[ÿPaUÿ\SR]URÿdS]N`[ÿ
_NVOUÿmlÿ}aUÿPQQoÿQvURÿPaUÿRQ`UÿdRQ]ÿaURÿ
dSPaUR{ÿtURR[ÿ\SR]UR{ÿNVÿ|nnlÿ}aUÿN_ÿS`_QÿPaUÿ
dQXVZURÿQdÿQPU`ÿUZÿSVZÿtQdNVQÿRU_PSXRSVP{ÿ
sl
}aUÿ^S_ÿW
RUvNQX_`[ÿVS]UZÿbfÿqQ]UVÿQdÿ
~Vd`XUVOUÿVPRUWRUVUXRÿQdÿPaUÿeUSRÿNVÿPaUÿUOU`x
`UVOUÿOSPUzQR[ÿNVÿ|n|n{ÿ^QVÿPaUÿ
tQXRN_]ÿ~VZX_PR[ÿs__QONSPNQVÿQdÿ
fSVSZSi_ÿbX_NVU__ÿQdÿPaUÿeUSRÿ
S^SRZÿNVÿ|nmÿSVZÿ^S_ÿVS]UZÿ
QPU`NURÿQdÿPaUÿeUSRÿh[ÿQPU`NURÿ
YSzSyNVUÿNVÿ|nml
taN_ÿ]NzaPÿhUÿQVUÿQdÿ][ÿ
WRQXZU_Pÿ]Q]UVP_UvUR{ÿ\SR]x
URÿ_SNZÿNVÿSÿcNVoUZ~VÿWQ_Pl
s_ÿSÿf{ÿ~ÿdNUROU`[ÿhU`NUvUÿNVÿ
`USZNVzÿ^NPaÿ`QvUlÿ~ÿ^SVPÿUvUR[ÿ
U]W`Q[UUÿSVZÿzXU_Pÿ^aQÿ^S`o_ÿ
QVPQÿQXRÿWRQWURPNU_ÿPQÿdUU`ÿOU`UhRSPUZÿSVZÿ^U`x
OQ]UÿUSOP`[ÿS_ÿPaU[ÿSRUl
URÿWQ_PÿdXRPaURÿ_SNZÿPaSPÿNVÿWRSOPNOU{ÿNVx
O`X_NQVÿN_ÿNVÿhQPaÿhNzÿSVZÿ_]S``ÿNVNPNSPNvU_{ÿ
dRQ]ÿzUVZURxNVO`X_NvUÿ^S_aRQQ]_{ÿWRQVQXV_ÿ
QVÿU]SN`ÿ_NzVSPXRU_ÿSVZÿVS]UÿPSz_{ÿWRNZUÿUvUVP_ÿ
SPÿPaUNRÿWRQWURPNU_{ÿXUURÿ`QvUÿNVÿ]SRoUPNVz{ÿ
SVZÿhUVUdNP_ÿPaSPÿ_XWWQRPÿzUVZURxSddNR]NVzÿ
WRQOUZXRU_l
taN_ÿS^SRZÿN_ÿzNvUVÿPQÿNVZNvNZXS`_ÿ^aQÿ
ZU]QV_PRSPUÿUOUWPNQVS`ÿ`USZUR_aNWÿSVZÿSZx
vQOSO[ÿ^NPaNVÿPaUÿ|}crbtg~ÿhX_NVU__ÿOQ]x
]XVNP[liÿh vNQX_`[{ÿVQPaNVzÿaSWWUV_ÿhUOSX_UÿQdÿ
QVUÿNVZNvNZXS`lÿ~i]ÿ_QÿzRSPUdX`ÿdQRÿ][ÿS]SyNVzÿ
PUS]ÿ^aQÿUV_XRU_ÿPaSPÿUvUR[PaNVzÿ^UÿZQÿN_ÿ
OUVPURUZÿSRQXVZÿNVO`X_NQVÿQXRÿaNRNVzÿWRSOPNOU_{ÿ
`USRVNVzÿ]SPURNS`_{ÿ]SRoUPNVz{ÿZSN`[ÿQWURSPNQV_{ÿ
WQ`NONU_{ÿzXU_PÿUWURNUVOUÿSVZÿ_Qÿ]XOaÿ]QRUl
11?:2ÿ::67ÿ4?70;?:2ÿ5:;ÿÿ95:;<ÿ=54>?4ÿF0:7ÿC70:?77ÿ?5;?4ÿ3Eÿ2B?ÿ?54ÿF54;ÿ
3C42?7<ÿ3Eÿ95:;
<ÿ=54>?4ÿ0:?;:
95:;<ÿ=54>?4ÿ
Page 11 of 132
Goldstream Gazette Wednesday, December 10, 2025 A27www.goldstreamgazette.com
ÄʍƨʕƨȸʯƨʍʭÑƨʍǾƨ
ʕ
Ä
ʍƨʕƨȸʯƨʍʭÑƨʍǾƨʕ
ʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭ
ʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭʭ
Ǿ
ƨʕ
Ǿƨʕ
Ǿƨʕ
ƨʕƨʕ
ƨʕ
ƨʕ
You’re Just a Place
That I Know
a©éÙÝûƤ
#ÙéÙûęƤĖĔĖĚ
ěƥėĔSA
a¬»äÝäĖęĔƴĚęĚƴĔĖěęǙÄÙûõ¬ÅÝÖÙƣ
The story of Adrian’s Ukrainian
grandparents and their flight
from WWII Europe.
ĚƴĔĖěę Ǚ ÄÙûõ¬ÅÝÖÙ
Adrian Glynn McMorran
CRD housing targets 5,000
rental homes by 2045
The Capital Region Hous-
ing Corporation (CRHC) aims
to create 5,000 new affordable
homes in the next two decades.
During its Nov. 26 meeting,
the board endorsed the frame-
work – CRHC 2045: A Path to
5,000 – outlining the potential
for the corporation to build
on momentum and do more
to provide affordable rentals
in the region.
In February 2024, the CRD
board approved a bylaw in-
creasing its borrowing author-
ity to $85 million to advance
housing opportunities that will
have the greatest benefit for
the region.
The framework establishes a
foundation for continued col-
laboration between the CRHC,
the CRD, and other orders of
government which may be lev-
eraged for additional funding
support.
The goal of up to 5,000 by
2045 includes more than 1,000
new rental homes are already
underway and expected to be
completed between 2027 and
2030. Adopting a framework
will guide the CRHC to work
toward delivering up to 2,000
additional new rental homes
between 2031 and 2045, the
CRD said in a news release.
The CRHC has delivered
affordable, inclusive, and ad-
equate housing across the re-
gion for more than 40 years
and now provides homes for
more than 4,300 tenants in
more than 50 properties across
eight municipalities.
Construction in Victoria on May 6, 2024. (Black Press Media file)
Page 12 of 132
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LANGFORD
DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT
DVP25-0003 – 116-832 McCallum Road
That Development Variance Permit No. DVP25-0003 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford
to Ahura Yurchenko to operate a bakery at 116-832 McCallum Road, pursuant to section 498 of the
Local Government Act, and subject to the following:
1. Variances
The following regulations of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied pursuant to section 498 of the Local
Government Act:
a) That Table 1 of section 4.01.01 be varied to reduce the off-street parking requirement for a
bakery at Unit 116-832 McCallum Road from the required 1 per 20m
2
of gross floor area to
1 per 45m
2
of gross floor area; and
b) That the variance is no longer valid upon expiry of the Temporary Use Permit and any renewal
that may be granted.
Page 13 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
Informaon on how to parcipate in this meeng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
Meeng ID #897 0956 7061
File Nos: TUP25-0003 and DVP25-0003
Locaon: 116-832 McCallum Road, as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: Mixed Use Employment (MUE2)
Purpose: Applicaon to allow for the temporary use of a bakery and to vary the
required parking for the bakery.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeng.
Ask Quesons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit Quesons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your rst inial, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submied to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeng.
Speak at the Meeng: You may speak during the “Public Parcipaon” secon of
the meeng. Parcipaon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaon.
Watch the Meeng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
Page 14 of 132
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF LANGFORD
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
TUP25-0004 – 101-945 Reunion Avenue
That Temporary Use Permit No. TUP25-0004 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford to The
Original Farm Langford Ltd. to operate a non-medical cannabis retail store at #101-945 Reunion
Avenue), subject to the following terms
and conditions, and notwithstanding Sec. 3.02.02(5) of Zoning
Bylaw No. 300:
1. Conditions
a) Exterior walls shall be treated in a manner and colour that is consistent with other parts of the
building which the business occupies. If the non-medical cannabis retail store occupies a stand-
alone building, then the exterior of the building will exhibit colours from a muted, earth tone
palette with contrasting accent colours for windows, trim and doors. Bold or vivid colours that
are intended to be distinctive and eye-catching (e.g.: lime green or fire engine red) may be used
on signage, but not on the building façade or trim to the satisfaction of the Director of
Development Services;
b)
All windows shall be opaque or constructed with spandrel panels behind. Windows and
spandrels may not be embellished with any form of imagery;
c)
Security devices, such as window bars or roll shutters, shall be deployed on the inside of doors
or windows so as to be unobtrusive and invisible from the street;
d)
The applicant shall provide security measures associated with the premises from which the
non-medical cannabis retail store will operate in accordance with the applicant’s proposal in
response to the City of Langford Request for Proposal for the Retail Sales of Cannabis and
Cannabis Related Products (RFP), as determined by the Chief Administrative Officer;
e)
The applicant shall address issues of nuisance with respect to odours, smoke and noise relating
to public use of cannabis and cannabis products in accordance with the applicant’s proposal in
response to the RFP and the regulations, terms and conditions outlined in the Cannabis Control
and Licencing Act of B.C.;
f)
The applicant shall address impairment issues relating to public use of cannabis and cannabis
products for non-medical purposes in accordance with the applicant’s proposal in response to
the RFP and the regulations, terms and conditions outlined in the Cannabis Control and
Licencing Act of B.C.;
g) The non-medical cannabis retail store must be a stand-alone business;
h) The hours of operation of the non-
medical cannabis retail store shall be limited to 9am to 9pm
Sunday through Wednesday and 9am to 10pm Thursday through Saturday;
Page 15 of 132
Page 2 of 3
i) The applicant shall provide educational initiatives and materials associated with the impacts and
related social concerns of the non-medical use of cannabis and cannabis products in accordance
with the applicant’s proposal in response to the RFP and as outlined in the Cannabis Retail Store
Terms and Conditions, a handbook for the sale of non-medical cannabis in British Columbia;
j) The applicant shall conform to the regulations stipulated in the
Cannabis Control and Licencing
Act of British Columbia B.C. Reg.202/2018;
k) The Applicant shall ensure that the non-medical cannabis retail sale is in compliance with
all
applicable laws, including all City bylaws;
SIGNAGE
l) All signage shall be subject to a subsequent Sign Development Permit application process and
shall be constructed and placed in accordance with Langford Sign Bylaw No.1250 and to the
satisfaction of the Director of Development Services;
m)
All signage shall be architecturally compatible with the style, composition, materials, colours,
and details of the buildings within the development;
n)
The location and size of signs shall be architecturally integrated with the overall design of the
buildings;
o)
As a condition of issuance of this permit, and notwithstanding what is permitted by Bylaw
No. 1250, the business is limited to three signs only. This signage shall indicate the name of the
business only, and shall not display company slogans, and may not employ any play on words
with respect to cannabis or drug culture. This signage may be internally illuminated in
accordance with City guidelines, but may not be animated in any way or have variable
messaging;
p)
Notwithstanding article o), the business may have one illuminated sign which indicates that
the business is open, provided that this signage is affixed to the interior of a door or window
visible from the street and does not exceed an area of 0.2m2 (2ft2);
q) Sandwich board type signs are prohibited;
If a previous Development Permit has been issued with respect to Form and Character and no
new buildings or exterior renovations are being proposed some of these conditions may be
waived.
2. Whereas
a) The non-medicinal use of cannabis and cannabis related products has historically been
prohibited by federal law in Canada and, as a result, has historically been prohibited by the City
under its Zoning Bylaw No. 300;
Page 16 of 132
Page 3 of 3
b) On October 17, 2018, the Federal Government legalized the non-medicinal use of cannabis and
cannabis products;
c)
The Federal Government and the Provincial Government have developed a regulatory
framework for the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products for non-medicinal use;
d)
The City wishes to authorize the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products within its
boundaries, but recognizes that there are challenges associated with it doing so;
e) T
he City issued the Request for Proposals for the Retail Sales of Cannabis and Cannabis Related
Products to seek proposals from individuals and organizations interested in undertaking the
retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products for non-medicinal use within the City’s
boundaries, and required that proposals include details as to how the challenges with the retail
sale of cannabis and cannabis products would be addressed;
f) The City
received and reviewed over 30 proposals in response to the Request for Proposals,
and identified The Original Farm Langford Ltd. proposal as one that best addressed the
challenges with the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products; and,
g)
The Original Farm Langford Ltd. is committed to assisting the City and taking positive steps to
address the challenges with the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products;
Now therefore be it resolved that Council issue Temporary Use Permit TUP25-0004 to The
Original Farm Langford Ltd. for it to operate a Cannabis Retail Store at 101-945 Reunion Avenue
for a three-year term subject to the terms and conditions listed within.
3. Expiry
That the Temporary Use Permit be issued for a period of 36 months and will expire on
Saturday,
December 15, 2029.
Page 17 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeƟng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
InformaƟon on how to parƟcipate in this meeƟng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
MeeƟng ID #897 0956 7061
File No: TUP25-0004
LocaƟon: 101-945 Reunion Avenue as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: Belmont Market and Residences (C10)
Purpose: ApplicaƟon to conƟnue the exisƟng cannabis operaƟon.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noƟces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeƟng.
Ask QuesƟons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit QuesƟons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your first iniƟal, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submiƩed to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeƟng.
Speak at the MeeƟng: You may speak during the “Public ParƟcipaƟon” secƟon of
the meeƟng. ParƟcipaƟon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaƟon.
Watch the MeeƟng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
o
rt:
e report
w
w
il
il
l
l
bebe
be
a
a
vava
v
ilil
ab
ab
ab
e
ere
Langford.ca
no
Ɵ
ces
o
nce
t
t
he
he
he
a
a
a
gege
ge
nd
nd
n
a is
p
p
os
te
e
d to t
h
e we
b
be
be
be
fofo
fo
re
re
r
t
t
t
he
h
m
m
m
eeee
ee
Ɵn
Ɵn
Ɵn
g.
g.
g.
or
Em
Em
ai
ai
l:l:
pl
pl
pl
anan
a
nini
ni
ng
ng
ng
@l
@l
@l
an
an
an
gfgf
oror
d
d.
d
ca
ca
on
s:
MaMa
Ma
il
il
il
:
:
:
Ci
Ci
Ci
tyty
ty
o
o
o
f
f
La
ng
ng
n
fofo
fo
rd
rd
YoYo
Yo
uu
m
mumu
stst
i
i
nc
nc
lulu
de
de
y
y
ou
ou
r
r
fir
fir
fi
stst
s
i
i
ni
ni
ni
ƟaƟa
l,
l,
l
l
l
a
as
t
t
na
n
me,
re
re
si
si
s
de
de
ncnc
e.e.
e
CoCo
Co
rrrr
r
eses
es
popo
po
ndnd
nd
en
en
n
ce
ce
m
m
ay
a
b
b
e
e
susu
su
b
bm
iƩ
e
no
te
te
te
d
d
d
ab
ab
ov
ov
ov
e
e
e
an
an
an
d
d
d
wi
wi
w
ll
ll
ll
b
b
b
e
e
e
ci
ci
rc
c
ulul
at
a
a
ed
d
t
t
o
o
o
Co
Co
C
u
n
ci
me
me
e
eƟ
eƟ
eƟ
ngng
n
.
.
M
ee
Ɵn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
g:
g
g
g
g
g
g:
g
YoYo
u
u
ma
ma
y
y
spsp
p
ea
ea
k
k
du
du
ri
ri
n
ng
t
t
he
he
“
PuPu
bl
bl
b
ic
P
P
P
ar
ar
Ɵc
ip
aƟ
o
th
th
th
e e
meme
me
eƟ
eƟ
eƟ
ng
ng
g
.
P
P
ar
r
Ɵc
Ɵc
Ɵ
ip
ip
i
aƟ
aƟ
Ɵ
onon
n
i
i
s
s
byby
b
p
p
ho
ho
ho
ne
n
n
or vi
a
pepe
p
rsrs
rs
o
on
n
—
—
—
se
se
e
e
e
e
th
th
e
e
we
we
e
bsbs
s
it
it
it
e
e
e
fofo
f
r
r
r
momo
mo
rere
i
i
i
nf
nf
nf
or
o
o
m
a
Ɵ
o
eƟ
ng
ng
ng
ng
g
ng
ng
ng
:
:
:
:
:
ViVi
Vi
ew
ew
w
i
i
n
n
thth
th
e e
e
Zo
Zo
Zo
omom
o
a
a
pppp
pp
,
,
or
or
or
ww
w
at
at
ch
ch
ch
t
he
he
r
r
r
ec
ec
c
oror
di
d
n
Page 18 of 132
0123456789ÿ087557ÿÿÿÿÿ !!!"#$%&'()*+,#+-*((*".$,
/01ÿ34ÿ56780ÿ9:;ÿ40<87:96ÿ=>1?ÿ=>6;ÿ9:>@968
ABCDEÿGEDHIBCJÿBCKELCMKBHCMNNOÿPCHQCÿBCÿ
RMCSMLOÿTUVUWÿMXKELÿLEYDSBCJÿZ[ÿ\HBYHCE]ÿ
EMJNEYWÿK^Eÿ_HLK^ÿ`YNMC]ÿaBN]NBXEÿbEDHcELOÿ
dYYHDBMKBHCÿe_`a bdfÿ^MYÿEcHNcE]ÿBCKHÿMÿ
LEIMLPMGNEÿQBN]NBXEÿLEYDSEÿMC]ÿLE^MGBNBKMKBHCÿ
XMDBNBKOÿY\EDBMNBgBCJÿBCÿGNMDPÿGEMLÿDSGYÿMC]ÿ
GBL]YÿHXÿ\LEOh
_`abdiYÿIBYYBHCÿBYÿKHÿDMLEÿXHLÿBNNWÿBCjSLE]Wÿ
MC]ÿHL\^MCE]ÿQBN]NBXEWÿMC]ÿKHÿE]SDMKEÿK^Eÿ
\SGNBDÿHCÿQBN]NBXEÿMC]ÿECcBLHCIECKMNÿBYYSEYh
kEMLYÿHXÿ]E]BDMKBHCÿMC]ÿ^ML]ÿQHLPÿ^McEÿ
LEYSNKE]ÿBCÿK^HSYMC]YÿHXÿMCBIMNYÿGEBCJÿLEYl
DSE]WÿLE^MGBNBKMKE]ÿMC]ÿLENEMYE]hÿmELEÿMLEÿ
MÿXEQÿYKHLBEYÿHXÿMCBIMNYÿK^MKÿ^McEÿDHIEÿKHÿ
_`a bdÿXHLÿKLEMKIECKÿK^BYÿOEMLn
dÿoBNEMKE]ÿaHH]\EDPELÿDMIEÿKHÿ_`abdÿ
QBK^ÿ^BYÿXMDEÿYKSDPÿBCÿMÿLMKÿKLM\hÿmEÿ^M]ÿpSBKEÿ
YBJCBXBDMCKÿXMDBMNÿYQENNBCJÿGSKÿQBK^ÿHSLÿDMLEWÿ
^EÿBYÿ^EMNBCJÿQENNh
dÿOHSCJÿJLEMKÿGNSEÿ^ELHCÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿBCÿMÿ
PHBÿ\HC]ÿKMCJNE]ÿBCÿXBY^BCJÿNBCEWÿSCMGNEÿKHÿ
XLEEÿBKYENXhÿ
q\HCÿEr
MIBCMKBHCWÿQEÿ]BYDHcELE]ÿK^MKÿK^Eÿ
^ELHCÿ^M]ÿMNYHÿGEECÿY^HKÿMC]ÿK^Eÿ\ENNEKÿQMYÿ
YKBNN
ÿNH]JE]ÿBCÿBKYÿCEDPh
sHLKSCMKENOWÿK^EÿNEM]ÿ\ENNEKÿQMYÿYSDDEYYXSNNOÿ
LEIHcE]WÿMC]ÿK^EÿGBL]ÿBYÿLEDHcELBCJh
`CÿdSJSYKWÿMÿNBKKNEÿGEMcELÿPBKÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿ
YKLSJJNBCJÿBCÿK^EÿXMYKlIHcBCJÿLM\B]YÿHXÿK^Eÿ
tHQBD^MCÿbBcELhÿ_HÿIHIÿHLÿNH]JEÿBCÿYBJ^Khÿ
A^EÿBYÿCHQÿ]HBCJÿQENNÿBCÿHSLÿDMLEh
dÿDE]MLÿQMrQBCJÿQMYÿGLHSJ^KÿKHÿSYÿGEl
DMSYEÿYHIEHCEÿ^M]ÿ]ENBGELMKENOÿDNB\\E]ÿBKYÿ
QBCJYWÿNEMcBCJÿBKÿ]EXECYENEYYÿMC]ÿSCMGNEÿKHÿ
XNOhÿtNB\\BCJÿK^EÿQBCJYÿHXÿMÿQBN]ÿGBL]ÿYKLB\Yÿ
BKÿHXÿBKYÿXLEE]HIh
uS LÿGNMDPÿGEMLÿCSLYELOÿDSLLECKNOÿ^HN]YÿXBcEÿ
DSGYÿK^MKÿMLEÿJMBCBCJÿQEBJ^KÿMC]ÿ]HBCJÿQENNhÿ
v^EOÿQBNNÿGEÿLENEMYE]ÿGMDPÿBCKHÿK^EÿQBN]ÿCErKÿ
OEMLh
aEÿBCc
BKEÿK^Eÿ\SGNBDÿKHÿcBYBKWÿMC]ÿ^ELEÿMLEÿMÿ
XEQÿHXÿHSLÿCHClLENEMYMGNEÿMIGMYYM]HLÿMCBIMNYÿ
OHSÿDMCÿIEEKÿQ^ECÿOHSÿDHIEn
wxyÿ{|}x~ÿ|yx
bMEÿBYÿMÿXEIMNEÿGEMLÿQ^HÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿYKMLcBCJÿ
MC]ÿSCYKEM]OÿHCÿ^ELÿXEEKWÿNBPENOÿ]SEÿKHÿ^EM]ÿ
KLMSIMhÿA^EÿLEpSBLEYÿHCJHBCJÿDMLEÿXHLÿK^Eÿ
LEYKÿHXÿ^ELÿNBXEh
xyÿ{|x}ÿx}y
tMYEOWÿCHQÿMCÿM]SNKÿEMJNEWÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿHCÿ
K^EÿJLHSC]ÿQBK^ÿCHÿCEYKÿCEMLGOÿQ^ECÿ^EÿQMYÿ
MÿD^BDPhÿmEÿ^MYÿMÿCHClLE\MBLMGNEÿ]BYNHDMKE]ÿ
QBCJÿMC]ÿQBNNÿN
BcEÿ^ELEÿMKÿK^EÿDECKLEÿXHLÿK^Eÿ
LEYKÿHXÿ^BYÿNBXEh
x}yÿ{yxÿxÿ }
sMLNEOÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿCEMLÿTÿBNEÿmHSYEÿMXKELÿ
GEBCJÿ^BKÿGOÿMÿcE^BDNEhÿ
v^EÿDHNNBYBHCÿLEYSNKE]ÿBCÿMÿGM]NOÿGLHPECÿ
QBCJWÿQ^BD^ÿ^M]ÿKHÿGEÿ\MLKBMNNOÿMI\SKMKE]Wÿ
IMPBCJÿBKÿYHÿ^EÿDMCCHKÿXNOh
_`abdWÿMÿCHCl\LHXBKÿHLJMCBgMKBHCWÿBYÿYBKSl
MKE]ÿBCÿLLBCJKHCWÿhthÿv^EOÿMLEÿH\ECÿKHÿK^Eÿ
\SGNBDÿ]MBNOÿXHLÿcBEQBCJÿHXÿCHClLENEMYMGNEÿ
MCBIMNYh
BYBKÿK^EBLÿQEGYBKEÿMKÿQQQhCBQLMhHLJÿKHÿNEMLCÿ
IHLEÿMGHSKÿK^EBLÿ\LHJLMIYWÿLEM]ÿYKHLBEYÿMGHSKÿ
K^EBLÿMCBIMNYWÿMC]ÿNEMLCÿ^HQÿOHSÿDMCÿ^EN\ÿ
DMLEÿXHLÿQBN]NBXEh
ÿÿ¡ÿ¢¡£¤¡¥ÿ¦£ÿ§¢¦¨ÿÿÿ©¡ÿ¡£ª¡ÿÿ¡«ÿ£¥ÿÿ¬®ÿ
¯¡£°ÿÿ«£±ÿ«¡ÿ£ª«ÿÿ«ÿÿ¯¡¥²ÿ§³ª¡¥ÿÿ¢¦¨
Page 19 of 132
Surgeon and urologist Dr.
Michael J. Metcalfe had a
sinking feeling every time he
presented patients with a di-
lemma: they could either un-
dergo surgery close to home
but face higher risks, or trav-
el to Vancouver – or even the
U.S. – and endure longer wait
times but benefit from safer,
robot-assisted procedures.
“Every time I had that con-
versation, I just had knots in
my stomach. It didn’t feel right
always to have to put that de-
cision on patients.”
Coming from a family of
urologists, Metcalfe was
surprisingly close to robotic
surgery early on in his career:
his mother, while leading a
hospital foundation in Ed-
monton, helped raise money
for robotic equipment while
he pushed through medical
school. Later at MD Anderson
Cancer Center in Houston, he
sub-specialized in urological
oncology and robotic surgery.
He’d seen firsthand how
robotics improves accuracy,
visualization, reproducibility,
and puts less demand on the
health-care system.
So, while working in Victo-
ria – and knowing that open
surgery had made little prog-
ress in 20 years – he joined Dr.
McCracken and Dr. McAuley
to spearhead a mission to get
robotics to the region.
He got connected with Avery
Brohman, CEO of the Victoria
Hospital Foundation, and it
was a success. The foundation
raised $17 million, launched
the Island’s first surgical ro-
botics program out of Royal
Jubilee Hospital, and on Feb.
3, the da Vinci surgical robot
assisted in its first surgery.
Now, the foundation is in
phase 2, raising money for two
new surgical robots at Victoria
General Hospital: a da Vinci,
the same as what’s currently in
place at Royal Jubilee Hospi-
tal (RJH), and a neuro-robot
which will help treat brain and
spine disorders.
Metcalfe says it’s been great
having the da Vinci at RJH,
but due to its success, it’s in
very high demand. “Now we’re
all squabbling over time, and
I’m having to make a decision
on which patient deserves the
robot and which can wait,” he
said.
The campaign’s new aim is
to raise $21 million and put
Victoria on the map as one of
the few centres in Canada with
this advanced technology.
The draw is the benefits: for
the neuro-robot, Mazor X, one
study found a nearly six times
lower risk of surgical compli-
cations, and clinical studies
show typically above 98 per
cent accuracy for brain and
spine procedures.
The da Vinci surgical robot
would expand minimally in-
vasive care across gynecology,
pediatrics and general surgery.
It would also help high-risk
patients such as Gerald Ker-
sten, who was recently diag-
nosed with prostate cancer and
underwent robotic surgery in
the summer.
Kersten was a perfect candi-
date: with a rare blood-clotting
disorder, open surgery can be
incredibly dangerous for him.
His blood thinners mean he
runs the risk of bleeding too
much; if he goes off them, he
faces the risk of embolisms,
strokes or heart attacks.
What makes the da Vinci-as-
sisted surgery so much safer
is it works through “tiny little
half-inch stab wounds” rather
than a large incision, Kersten
explained. Once he understood
how it worked, there was no
second-guessing on his part
about whether or not to go
through with it.
What was additionally ben-
eficial was the quick recovery
time. “Patients are getting back
to their lives quicker, better,”
said Dr. Metcalfe.
Prior to surgery, Kersten, an
orthodontist, worried about
how long his recovery would
take and when he would return
to work and exercise. After the
robotics-assisted surgery, he
was back seeing his patients
within 10 days, and two weeks
later, he was on his bike. In six
weeks, he was cycling on his
dream trip to Italy.
“It’s amazing, because in
most cases, it would have
been six to eight weeks before I
could have gone back to work,”
he said. “I think most people
are surprised at how fast I was
back on my feet.”
These advancements in
Victoria are coming at a time
when cancer cases are project-
ed to rise – BC Cancer says
the demand for cancer care in
B.C. is expected to rise by 60
per cent in the next decade.
“Statistically, with our aging
population and people living
longer, the chances of someone
escaping some sort of surgery
later in their life is smaller than
it used to be,” Kersten said.
“And if it can be robotically
done, they’re going to be much
better off.”
Goldstream Gazette www.goldstreamgazette.comA26 Wednesday, December 10, 2025
Robotic surgery has Victoria man back on his bike in 2 weeks
Sam Duerksen
Gerald Kersten (left) underwent robotics-assisted surgery with Dr.
Michael J Metcalfe (far right) this summer. Here, they stand at the Visions
gala where donors raised over $3.6M to bring robotics to the Island.
(Courtesy Victoria Hospitals Foundation)
Page 20 of 132
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LANGFORD
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
TUP25-0005 – 933 Tayberry Terrace
That Temporary Use Permit No. TUP25-0005 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford to Hayan
Lee
to operate a home-based business at 933 Tayberry Terrace, subject to the following terms and
conditions, and notwithstanding Sec. 3.02.02(5) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300:
1.
Conditions
The following requirements be imposed pursuant to section 493 of the Local Government Act:
a) That the Temporary Use Permit be issued for a period of three years from time of issuance;
b) That the operator of the business obtains a business license from the City; and
c)
That the home remains the primary residence of the applicant for the duration of the
Temporary Use Permit.
Page 21 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeƟng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
InformaƟon on how to parƟcipate in this meeƟng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
MeeƟng ID #897 0956 7061
File Nos: TUP25-0005 and DVP25-0005
LocaƟon: 933 Tayberry Terrace, as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: Comprehensive Development—Boulder Ridge (CD10)
Purpose: ApplicaƟon to operate a home-based business and to vary the required
parking from two stalls to one stall in order to allow clients to park in
the driveway.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noƟces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeƟng.
Ask QuesƟons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit QuesƟons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your first iniƟal, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submiƩed to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeƟng.
Speak at the MeeƟng: You may speak during the “Public ParƟcipaƟon” secƟon of
the meeƟng. ParƟcipaƟon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaƟon.
Watch the MeeƟng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
o
rt:
e report
w
w
ilil
l
l
bebe
aa
vava
ilil
ab
ab
e
ere
Langford.ca
no
Ɵ
ces
o
nce
t
t
hehe
a
a
gege
nd
nd
a is
p
p
osted to t
h
e we
b
be
be
fofo
re
re
t
t
he
h
m
m
eeee
ƟnƟn
g.g.
or
Em
Em
ai
ai
l:
l:
pl
pl
anan
nini
ng
ng
@l@l
an
an
gfgf
oror
d
d.
ca
ca
on
s:
MaMa
ilil
::
Ci
Ci
tyty
o
o
f
f
La
ng
ng
fofo
rdrd
YoYo
u
u
mumu
stst
i
i
nc
nc
lulu
de
de
y
y
ou
ou
r
r
fir
fir
stst
i
i
ni
ni
Ɵa
Ɵa
l,
l,
l
l
a
as
t
t
na
n
me,
r
e
si
s
de
de
nc
nc
e.
e.
Co
Co
rr
rr
eses
popo
ndnd
en
en
ce
ce
m
m
ay
a
b
b
e
e
su
su
b
bm
iƩ
e
no
te
te
d
d
ab
ab
ov
ov
e
e
an
an
d
d
wi
wi
ll
ll
b
b
e
e
ci
ci
rc
ulul
at
a
ed
d
t
o
o
Co
C
u
n
ci
me
me
eƟeƟ
ngng
.
.
M
ee
Ɵn
n
g:
g:
g
YoYo
u
u
ma
ma
y
y
spsp
ea
a
k
k
du
du
ri
ri
n
ng
t
t
he
he
“
Pu
Pu
bl
bl
ic
P
P
ar
a
Ɵc
ip
aƟ
o
thth
e e
meme
eƟ
eƟ
ng
ng
.
P
P
ar
r
Ɵc
Ɵc
i
ip
aƟ
aƟ
onon
i
i
s
s
by
by
pp
ho
ho
ne
n
or vi
a
pepe
rsrs
on
on
—
—
sese
e e
th
th
e
e
we
we
bsbs
itit
e e
fofo
r
r
momo
re
re
i
i
nf
nf
or
o
m
a
Ɵ
o
eƟ
ng
ng
ng
:
:
:
Vi
Vi
ew
ew
i
i
n
n
th
th
e e
ZoZo
omom
aa
pppp
,
,
oror
ww
at
at
ch
ch
t
he
he
r
r
ecec
oror
di
d
n
Page 22 of 132
0123456789ÿ087557ÿÿÿÿÿ !!!"#$%&'()*+,#+-*((*".$,
/01ÿ34ÿ56780ÿ9:;ÿ40<87:96ÿ=>1?ÿ=>6;ÿ9:>@968
ABCDEÿGEDHIBCJÿBCKELCMKBHCMNNOÿPCHQCÿBCÿ
RMCSMLOÿTUVUWÿMXKELÿLEYDSBCJÿZ[ÿ\HBYHCE]ÿ
EMJNEYWÿK^Eÿ_HLK^ÿ`YNMC]ÿaBN]NBXEÿbEDHcELOÿ
dYYHDBMKBHCÿe_`a bdfÿ^MYÿEcHNcE]ÿBCKHÿMÿ
LEIMLPMGNEÿQBN]NBXEÿLEYDSEÿMC]ÿLE^MGBNBKMKBHCÿ
XMDBNBKOÿY\EDBMNBgBCJÿBCÿGNMDPÿGEMLÿDSGYÿMC]ÿ
GBL]YÿHXÿ\LEOh
_`abdiYÿIBYYBHCÿBYÿKHÿDMLEÿXHLÿBNNWÿBCjSLE]Wÿ
MC]ÿHL\^MCE]ÿQBN]NBXEWÿMC]ÿKHÿE]SDMKEÿK^Eÿ
\SGNBDÿHCÿQBN]NBXEÿMC]ÿECcBLHCIECKMNÿBYYSEYh
kEMLYÿHXÿ]E]BDMKBHCÿMC]ÿ^ML]ÿQHLPÿ^McEÿ
LEYSNKE]ÿBCÿK^HSYMC]YÿHXÿMCBIMNYÿGEBCJÿLEYl
DSE]WÿLE^MGBNBKMKE]ÿMC]ÿLENEMYE]hÿmELEÿMLEÿ
MÿXEQÿYKHLBEYÿHXÿMCBIMNYÿK^MKÿ^McEÿDHIEÿKHÿ
_`a bdÿXHLÿKLEMKIECKÿK^BYÿOEMLn
dÿoBNEMKE]ÿaHH]\EDPELÿDMIEÿKHÿ_`abdÿ
QBK^ÿ^BYÿXMDEÿYKSDPÿBCÿMÿLMKÿKLM\hÿmEÿ^M]ÿpSBKEÿ
YBJCBXBDMCKÿXMDBMNÿYQENNBCJÿGSKÿQBK^ÿHSLÿDMLEWÿ
^EÿBYÿ^EMNBCJÿQENNh
dÿOHSCJÿJLEMKÿGNSEÿ^ELHCÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿBCÿMÿ
PHBÿ\HC]ÿKMCJNE]ÿBCÿXBY^BCJÿNBCEWÿSCMGNEÿKHÿ
XLEEÿBKYENXhÿ
q\HCÿEr
MIBCMKBHCWÿQEÿ]BYDHcELE]ÿK^MKÿK^Eÿ
^ELHCÿ^M]ÿMNYHÿGEECÿY^HKÿMC]ÿK^Eÿ\ENNEKÿQMYÿ
YKBNN
ÿNH]JE]ÿBCÿBKYÿCEDPh
sHLKSCMKENOWÿK^EÿNEM]ÿ\ENNEKÿQMYÿYSDDEYYXSNNOÿ
LEIHcE]WÿMC]ÿK^EÿGBL]ÿBYÿLEDHcELBCJh
`CÿdSJSYKWÿMÿNBKKNEÿGEMcELÿPBKÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿ
YKLSJJNBCJÿBCÿK^EÿXMYKlIHcBCJÿLM\B]YÿHXÿK^Eÿ
tHQBD^MCÿbBcELhÿ_HÿIHIÿHLÿNH]JEÿBCÿYBJ^Khÿ
A^EÿBYÿCHQÿ]HBCJÿQENNÿBCÿHSLÿDMLEh
dÿDE]MLÿQMrQBCJÿQMYÿGLHSJ^KÿKHÿSYÿGEl
DMSYEÿYHIEHCEÿ^M]ÿ]ENBGELMKENOÿDNB\\E]ÿBKYÿ
QBCJYWÿNEMcBCJÿBKÿ]EXECYENEYYÿMC]ÿSCMGNEÿKHÿ
XNOhÿtNB\\BCJÿK^EÿQBCJYÿHXÿMÿQBN]ÿGBL]ÿYKLB\Yÿ
BKÿHXÿBKYÿXLEE]HIh
uS LÿGNMDPÿGEMLÿCSLYELOÿDSLLECKNOÿ^HN]YÿXBcEÿ
DSGYÿK^MKÿMLEÿJMBCBCJÿQEBJ^KÿMC]ÿ]HBCJÿQENNhÿ
v^EOÿQBNNÿGEÿLENEMYE]ÿGMDPÿBCKHÿK^EÿQBN]ÿCErKÿ
OEMLh
aEÿBCc
BKEÿK^Eÿ\SGNBDÿKHÿcBYBKWÿMC]ÿ^ELEÿMLEÿMÿ
XEQÿHXÿHSLÿCHClLENEMYMGNEÿMIGMYYM]HLÿMCBIMNYÿ
OHSÿDMCÿIEEKÿQ^ECÿOHSÿDHIEn
wxyÿ{|}x~ÿ|yx
bMEÿBYÿMÿXEIMNEÿGEMLÿQ^HÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿYKMLcBCJÿ
MC]ÿSCYKEM]OÿHCÿ^ELÿXEEKWÿNBPENOÿ]SEÿKHÿ^EM]ÿ
KLMSIMhÿA^EÿLEpSBLEYÿHCJHBCJÿDMLEÿXHLÿK^Eÿ
LEYKÿHXÿ^ELÿNBXEh
xyÿ{|x}ÿx}y
tMYEOWÿCHQÿMCÿM]SNKÿEMJNEWÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿHCÿ
K^EÿJLHSC]ÿQBK^ÿCHÿCEYKÿCEMLGOÿQ^ECÿ^EÿQMYÿ
MÿD^BDPhÿmEÿ^MYÿMÿCHClLE\MBLMGNEÿ]BYNHDMKE]ÿ
QBCJÿMC]ÿQBNNÿN
BcEÿ^ELEÿMKÿK^EÿDECKLEÿXHLÿK^Eÿ
LEYKÿHXÿ^BYÿNBXEh
x}yÿ{yxÿxÿ }
sMLNEOÿQMYÿXHSC]ÿCEMLÿTÿBNEÿmHSYEÿMXKELÿ
GEBCJÿ^BKÿGOÿMÿcE^BDNEhÿ
v^EÿDHNNBYBHCÿLEYSNKE]ÿBCÿMÿGM]NOÿGLHPECÿ
QBCJWÿQ^BD^ÿ^M]ÿKHÿGEÿ\MLKBMNNOÿMI\SKMKE]Wÿ
IMPBCJÿBKÿYHÿ^EÿDMCCHKÿXNOh
_`abdWÿMÿCHCl\LHXBKÿHLJMCBgMKBHCWÿBYÿYBKSl
MKE]ÿBCÿLLBCJKHCWÿhthÿv^EOÿMLEÿH\ECÿKHÿK^Eÿ
\SGNBDÿ]MBNOÿXHLÿcBEQBCJÿHXÿCHClLENEMYMGNEÿ
MCBIMNYh
BYBKÿK^EBLÿQEGYBKEÿMKÿQQQhCBQLMhHLJÿKHÿNEMLCÿ
IHLEÿMGHSKÿK^EBLÿ\LHJLMIYWÿLEM]ÿYKHLBEYÿMGHSKÿ
K^EBLÿMCBIMNYWÿMC]ÿNEMLCÿ^HQÿOHSÿDMCÿ^EN\ÿ
DMLEÿXHLÿQBN]NBXEh
ÿÿ¡ÿ¢¡£¤¡¥ÿ¦£ÿ§¢¦¨ÿÿÿ©¡ÿ¡£ª¡ÿÿ¡«ÿ£¥ÿÿ¬®ÿ
¯¡£°ÿÿ«£±ÿ«¡ÿ£ª«ÿÿ«ÿÿ¯¡¥²ÿ§³ª¡¥ÿÿ¢¦¨
Page 23 of 132
Goldstream Gazette www.goldstreamgazette.comA28 Wednesday, December 10, 2025
RESERVE YOUR BOOTH TODAY!
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2026 | 11AM  3PM
TILLICUM CENTRE | 3170 Tillicum Rd, Victoria, BC
EMAIL EVENTS@BLACKPRESS.CA
CONNECT. SHARE. SHINE.
BECOME AN EXHIBITOR AT THE SENIORS EXPO!
at
Y
ung
Victoria real estate heads into the holidays in a lull
The streets and shops of Victoria are bus-
tling for the Christmas season, but the region’s
housing market is showing no signs of a hol-
iday rush.
A total of 451 properties were sold in the
Victoria Real Estate Board region this No-
vember, 18.1 per cent fewer than the 551
properties sold in November 2024 and 26.9
per cent fewer than in October 2025. Sales of
condominiums decreased by 36 per cent from
November 2024, with 119 units sold. Sales of
single-family homes decreased by 8.4 per cent
from November 2024, with 241 sold.
“We observed a slowing of the pace of sales
this month that we didn’t experience last year
at this time,” said Victoria Real Estate Board
chair Dirk VanderWal.
“This year-over-year difference in sales does
appear to be noteworthy, but it is because last
year’s sales were distributed differently than
they have been this year.”
He said while a sales rally ended 2024 in
atypical fashion, 2025 saw higher sales counts
during the spring market.
“Even though our winter numbers are softer
compared to last year, we are right on track for
this year’s total numbers to end up very close
to the four years previous. In fact, compared
to fewer than 400 November sales in both 2022
and 2023, this year’s activity was higher.”
There were 3,152 active listings for sale on
the Victoria Real Estate Board Multiple List-
ing Service at the end of November 2025, a
decrease of 7.9 per cent compared to the previ-
ous month and an 11.1 per cent increase from
the 2,836 active listings for sale at the end of
November 2024.
“Buyers have plenty of options and time to
make their decisions, and sellers know that
well-priced and well-presented homes will sell,
but that the market isn’t under the pressure it
had been in the early 2020s,” said VanderWal,
who characterized the tone in November as
one of patience.
“Overall, our market remains in a balanced
position. We can see that different types of
properties and different locations influence
where each home is on that scale of balance.”
The benchmark value for a single-family
home in the Victoria core in November 2025
was $1,276,700, down 2.8 per cent from the
$1,313,900 value in November 2024, and down
slightly from October’s value of $1,280,100.
The benchmark value for a condominium in
the Victoria core in November was $553,100,
a jump of two per cent from the November
2024 value of $542,100 and up slightly from
the October value of $549,000.
West Shore handyDART users invited to provide input on long-term plan
Nishadini Fonseka
BC Transit handyDART users are
invited to have their say on ways to
improve the service in Victoria’s 25-
year plan through an online survey and
open houses at three Greater Victoria
locations.
Open houses will be held at Royal
Canadian Legion, Langford Branch on
Dec. 10 at 6 p.m., Victoria Disability
Resource Centre in Victoria on Dec.
11 at 11 a.m. and SHOAL Centre and
Senior Services in Sidney on Dec. 13
at 10 a.m. The broader community
can provide input through the online
survey running until Dec. 22.
Feedback collected is expected to
help shape the long-term priorities for
handyDART, including customer ex-
perience improvements, future service
enhancements and actions to support
better access and equity for riders of
all abilities.
The public can provide their sug-
gestions on improving the experience
of booking, wait times, reliability and
satisfaction, as well as identifying ser-
vice upgrades, providing longer hours,
enhanced online booking tools and
electronic fare payment.
Recommendations on how to im-
prove access and equity are welcome to
refresh the long-term vision for transit
service in Victoria.
The insights gathered from the sur-
vey and in-person engagement will be
added to the updated Victoria Regional
Transit Plan. According to BC Transit,
this new plan will be the foundation for
the future service planning recommen-
dations of the service, to meet the needs
of the growing communities until 2050.
The online survey, additional details
on engagement events, and feedback
opportunities are available on the
website: engage.bctransit.com/handy-
dart_vrtp
BC Transit
handyDART
users can
now provide
suggestions
on improving
the experience
through book-
ing, wait times,
reliability and
satisfaction.
(Courtesy of BC
Transit)
Page 24 of 132
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LANGFORD
DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT
DVP25-0005 – 933 Tayberry Terrace
That Development Variance Permit No. DVP25-0005 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford
to Hayan Lee to vary the parking requirement in order to operate a home-based business at 933
Tayberry Terrace, subject to the following terms and conditions, and notwithstanding Section
3.02.02(5) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300:
1. Variances
The following regulations of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied pursuant to section 498 of the Local
Government Act:
a) That Table 1 of Section 4.01.01 be varied to reduce the off-street parking requirement for a
one-family dwelling at 933 Tayberry Terrace from the required two stalls to one stall, subject
to the following terms and conditions:
2. Conditions
The following requirements are imposed pursuant to section 498 of the Local Government Act:
a) That the variance is no longer valid upon expiry of the Temporary Use Permit and any renewal
that may be granted; and
b) That the garage must be used for the primary residence parking stall and the driveway left
available for the client during the hours the business is in operation.
Page 25 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
Informaon on how to parcipate in this meeng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
Meeng ID #897 0956 7061
File Nos: TUP25-0005 and DVP25-0005
Locaon: 933 Tayberry Terrace, as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: Comprehensive Development—Boulder Ridge (CD10)
Purpose: Applicaon to operate a home-based business and to vary the required
parking from two stalls to one stall in order to allow clients to park in
the driveway.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeng.
Ask Quesons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit Quesons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your rst inial, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submied to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeng.
Speak at the Meeng: You may speak during the “Public Parcipaon” secon of
the meeng. Parcipaon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaon.
Watch the Meeng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
Page 26 of 132
CITY OF LANGFORD
DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT
DVP25-0001 – 932 Rowils Crescent
That Development Variance Permit No. DVP25-0001 be issued by the Council for the City of Langford
to Sam Lawless of Citta Construction Ltd. on behalf of Kayla Jadresko by varying Zoning Bylaw
No. 1000 to allow a residential development at the property at 932 Rowils Crescent, pursuant to
section 493 of the Local Government Act, and subject to the following:
1. Appendix
The site be developed in substantial compliance with the site plan attached (Appendix A),
including:
a) That a northern interior lot line setback of at least 7.5 m is provided for both proposed lots,
subject to confirmation of the SPEA by a Qualified Environmental Professional;
b) That a southern interior lot line setback of at least 5.0 m is provided for proposed lot A/B; and
c) That a southern interior lot line setback of at least 9.7 m is provided for proposed lot C/D.
2. Variances
The following regulations of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied pursuant to section 498 of the Local
Government Act:
a) That section 6.22.02(4) be varied to permit a panhandle lot in the R2 Zone;
b) That section 6.22.07(1)(a) be varied to reduce the front lot line setback from the required
3.0 m to 1.50 m for both proposed dwellings; and
c) That section 6.22.07(1)(b) be varied to reduce the rear lot line setback from the required
3.0 m to 1.51 m for both proposed dwellings.
3. Conditions
The following requirement be imposed pursuant to section 498 of the Local Government Act:
a) That a Section 219 Covenant limiting the density of development on each to a maximum of
two dwelling units is registered, to the satisfaction of the Director Community Planning and
Development Services prior to subdivision approval.
Page 27 of 132
Notice of Intent
City Hall Council Chambers
Third Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
This meeng will be held electronically and in person at the above address.
Informaon on how to parcipate in this meeng is listed below.
MEETING DATE: STARTING AT:
December 15, 2025 7:00PM
How to Connect: Teleconference # 1-855-703-8985 (Canada Toll Free)
1-778-907-2071 (long distance charges may apply)
Zoom.us or Zoom app on your mobile device
Meeng ID #897 0956 7061
File No: DVP25-0001
Locaon: 932 Rowils Crescent, as shown shaded on the map
Zoning: One- and Two-Family Residenal (R2)
Purpose: Applicaon to vary the City of Langford Zoning Bylaw No. 300 to allow
for a creaon of a panhandle lot in the R2 Zone and to vary the front
and rear lot line setbacks, to allow for a duplex to be constructed on
each lot.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
IMPORTANT – COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE
OWNER/OCCUPANT
Read the Report: The report will be available here Langford.ca/city-hall/public-
noces once the agenda is posted to the website the Friday
before the meeng.
Ask Quesons or Email: planning@langford.ca
Submit Quesons: Mail: City of Langford
You must include your rst inial, last name, and city of
residence. Correspondence may be submied to the email
noted above and will be circulated to Council before the
meeng.
Speak at the Meeng: You may speak during the “Public Parcipaon” secon of
the meeng. Parcipaon is by phone or via Zoom app, or in
person—see the website for more informaon.
Watch the Meeng: View in the Zoom app, or watch the recording at Langford.ca.
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue, Langford, BC V9B 2X8 | t 250.478.7882
«File»
«Recipients» «Current»
«MailingAddress»
«City» «Prov» «PostalCode»
Page 28 of 132
t 250.478.7882
e administration@langford.ca
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford, BC V9B 2X8
Staff Report to Council
DATE: Monday, December 15, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Planning
SUBJECT: Parking Bylaw Modernization and Downtown On-Street Parking Strategy
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In September 2024, following a Request for Proposal process, Watt Consulting Group (Watt) was
awarded the contract to complete the modernization of Part 4: Off-Street Parking and Bicycle
Regulations of the City of Langford’s Zoning Bylaw No. 300. Three phases of work have been
completed to date, including background review, data collection and analysis, and consultation.
Watt has also been engaged to prepare an on-street parking strategy for downtown Langford. The
objectives of this strategy are to determine the existing on-street parking capacity of downtown
Langford, to understand the overall parking conditions including occupancy, duration and turnover
rates, and to recommend parking management tools and infrastructure improvements that can
address current and future challenges.
Watt will be providing a comprehensive presentation of these projects at this meeting, including an
update of work to date, an overview of initial findings for the on-street parking strategy, and their
recommendations for the new off-street parking bylaw for Council’s consideration and direction.
BACKGROUND:
Council included the following objective in their 2023-2027 Council Strategic Plan:
1i – Review the Zoning Bylaw Parking Requirements in the City Centre
The scope of this objective was expanded by resolution at the May 9, 2024, Council meeting to include a
full review of Zoning Bylaw No. 300’s off-street parking requirements, bicycle parking requirements, and
included further direction to explore options to include other Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) measures.
In accordance with this direction, staff posted a Request for Proposals for professional consulting work
to complete this project. The contract for this work and the related work to prepare an on-street
parking strategy for downtown Langford was awarded to Watt Consulting Group.
Page 29 of 132
Parking Bylaw and Downtown On-Street Parking
20251215 – Council Report
Page 2 of 5
In June 2024, Council adopted Bylaw No. 2160 and Bylaw No. 2155 to establish a Transit-Oriented Area
within 400m of the Station Ave transit exchange and to remove minimum residential parking
requirements from new development proposals within the same area. Both bylaws were prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act as enacted through Bill 47 – Housing
Statutes (Transit-Oriented Areas) Amendment Act.
COMMENTARY:
Since awarding the contract, Watt Consulting has completed three phases of the parking bylaw
modernization project, including background review, data collection and analysis, and public and key
partner engagement. Watt will be providing a summary of the work to date as part of a presentation at
this meeting, and the engagement summary is attached to this report.
Following their analysis of the results from these first three phases, Watt has developed nine key
recommendations for the new bylaw, two of which have options for Council to consider. The
recommendations as presented involve establishing more consistent off-street vehicle and loading
standards that better meet demand, modernizing regulations for accessible parking and other specialty
parking, updating bicycle parking requirements, and implementing bicycle parking design standards that
reflect current and future trends.
More specifically, the recommendations include:
Recommendation 1: Residential parking in the City Centre:
o Option 1a: Expanding the removal of minimum residential parking ratios from the
Transit-Oriented Area to the rest of the City Centre, and implementing minimum TDM
requirements;
o Option 1b: Expanding the removal of minimum residential parking ratios from the
Transit-Oriented Area to areas of the City Centre that are located within 200m of future
transit corridors, and implementing minimum TDM requirements;
While Watt will outline these options during their presentation, it’s worth noting that a 200m
buffer around the future transit corridors identified in the draft Transportation Master Plan
encompasses most of the lands within the Downtown component of the City Centre OCP
designation. The remaining City Centre lands fall within 400m of these corridors.
Recommendation 2: Reducing multi-family residential parking ratios in all other OCP
designations to better reflect demand, and allowing reductions in conjunction with optional
TDM measures;
Recommendation 3: Reducing residential visitor parking requirements to better reflect demand;
Page 30 of 132
Parking Bylaw and Downtown On-Street Parking
20251215 – Council Report
Page 3 of 5
Recommendation 4: Commercial parking in the City Centre:
o Option 4a: Removing minimum parking ratios while maintaining accessible and loading
requirements;
o Option 4b: Removing minimum parking ratios within 200m of transit corridors in the
City Centre while maintaining accessible and loading requirements;
Recommendation 5: Consolidating and updating minimum commercial and industrial parking
ratios in all other OCP designations;
Recommendation 6: Modernizing bike parking standards (ratios and dimensions) and adding
mobility scooter parking requirements;
Recommendation 7: Revising loading parking ratios and design standards;
Recommendation 8: Updating accessible parking ratios and design standards.
Recommendation 9: Modernizing cash-in-lieu policies.
Watt will deliver a comprehensive presentation outlining these recommendations at this meeting. This
will provide Council with an opportunity to review the recommendations in more detail and ask any
clarifying questions. Following this discussion, Council may wish to provide direction to staff regarding
next steps.
This presentation will also include an update of work completed to date on the on-street parking
strategy, including data collection and analysis, public engagement findings, and initial
recommendations for the strategy framework. This update is for information purposes only.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no known financial implications at this time.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no known legal implications at this time.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
1i – Review the Zoning Bylaw parking requirements in the City Centre.
1j – Review downtown public parking needs and related policies.
Page 31 of 132
Parking Bylaw and Downtown On-Street Parking
20251215 – Council Report
Page 4 of 5
OPTIONS:
Option 1
THAT Council direct staff to prepare a bylaw to update Part 4: Off-Street Parking and Bicycle Regulations
of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 based on the nine recommendations from Watt Consulting Group’s presentation,
including option 1a and 4a.
Option 2
THAT Council direct staff to prepare a bylaw to update Part 4: Off-Street Parking and Bicycle Regulations
of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 based on the nine recommendations from Watt Consulting Group’s presentation,
including option 1b and 4b.
Option 3
THAT Council direct staff to prepare a bylaw to update Part 4: Off-Street Parking and Bicycle Regulations
of Zoning Bylaw No. 300, with the following amendments to the recommendations from Watt Consulting
Group’s presentation:
a) ______________;
b) ______________;
c) ______________;
OR Option 4
THAT Council take no action at this time with respect to the Off-Street Parking and Bicycle Parking
presentation by Watt Consulting Group.
SUBMITTED BY: Matt Notley, Planner II, Community Planning and Climate Change
Concurrence: Melisa Miles, Manager of Legislative Services
Concurrence: Donna Petrie, Senior Manager of Communications & Economic Development
Concurrence: Yari Nielsen, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities
Concurrence: Leah Stohmann, RPP, MCIP, Director of Community Planning and Development
Concurrence: Katelyn Balzer, P.Eng., Director of Engineering and Public Works
Concurrence: Michael Dillabaugh, CPA, CA, Director of Finance
Concurrence: Marie Watmough, Director of Legislative & Protective Services
Concurrence: Braden Hutchins, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Concurrence: Darren Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Officer
Page 32 of 132
Parking Bylaw and Downtown On-Street Parking
20251215 – Council Report
Page 5 of 5
Attachment: Appendix A – Parking Bylaw Modernization Engagement Summary
Page 33 of 132
Langford Parking Bylaw
Modernization
Engagement Summary
City of Langford | August 25, 2025
Page 34 of 132
Table of Contents
Engagement Objectives & Project Timeline
Online Survey Results
Focus Group Results
Key Takeaways
Project Overview
Methodology
2
3
4
5
9
18
21
Page 35 of 132
Project Overview
Project Background
The purpose of this project is to modernize the City’s off-
street parking and loading requirements to align with
current trends, best practices, and the emerging needs of
Langford’s land use and transportation context.
The City of Langford is undertaking a comprehensive review of
its off-street vehicle, bicycle, and off-street loading requirements
in Part 4 of Zoning Bylaw 300. The City’s parking requirements
have not gone through a comprehensive update since the
2000s. Since then, the City has undergone unprecedented
population growth, including the addition of significant
residential and commercial density that has also brought new
off-street parking in the form of surface lots and underground
parkades. Over this time, the approach to off-street parking
within Langford has varied widely, with some developers
providing parking amounts in accordance with the City’s Zoning
Bylaw and others requesting parking variances to provide a
parking supply that better suits their target markets.
Project Objectives
The desired outcomes of the Parking Bylaw
Modernization Project are as follows:
• More consistent off-street vehicle and
loading standards that better meet demand
• Modernized regulations for accessible
parking and other specialty parking (e.g.,
electric mobility)
• Enhanced bicycle parking requirements and
design standards that reflect current and
future trends
3
Page 36 of 132
Engagement Objectives & Timeline
Project TimelineEngagement Objectives
The overall goal of the public and interest holder engagement
process was to understand general priorities and level of
support for the proposed changes from the community at large
and any potential implications they may have for the
development and business community.
Understanding the community’s general priorities and level of
support for the changes is an important outcome for this project.
Background Review
Data Collection & Analysis
Consultation & Engagement
Draft Bylaw
Fall 2024
Fall 2025 – Winter 2025
Spring – Summer 2025
Summer – Fall 2025
4
Page 37 of 132
Methodology
Off-street vs. On-street Parking
The focus of the Langford Parking Bylaw
Modernization project is off-street parking.
A separate Downtown On-Street Parking
Strategy is being undertaken to review and
provide recommendations for on-street parking in
downtown Langford.
While the focus of all engagement activities was
surrounding off-street parking to align with the
goals of the project, a few on-street parking
questions were included in the public online
survey to help inform the recommendations in the
Downtown On-Street Parking Strategy.
The graphic at right was used in all public-facing
communications to differentiate off-street and on-
street parking.
5
Page 38 of 132
Methodology
Focus Groups
Three virtual focus groups were held in June 2025
with members of the development, business, rental
and strata community, and shared mobility to
present preliminary ideas for changing the parking
bylaw. Participants were asked to provide their
feedback on three topic areas:
1. Residential Parking & Transportation Demand
Management
2. Commercial Parking
3. Loading
A total of 24 invitations were sent to interest
holders, with 16
total participants.
The focus groups were held on Microsoft Teams and
facilitated using Miro.
6
Page 39 of 132
Methodology
The focus group discussion questions included:
Residential Parking + TDM:
• What are your thoughts on setting
parking ratios by land use designation?
• What are your thoughts on removing
parking requirements and tying it TDM?
• Do you think that these TDM measures
are appropriate?
Commercial Parking:
• What are your thoughts on
eliminating commercial
parking requirements in the
City Centre?
• Should commercial parking
requirements be designated
by land use designation?
• What are your thoughts on
parking maximums?
Loading:
• How can we make providing loading on
your site easier for you? Will having a
smaller loading space type (i.e., Type A
spaces) help?
• Do you think multi-unit residential
buildings need loading space
requirements?
• What are your thoughts on our proposed
rate thresholds? Are they reasonable?
• When in the development process do
you start to think about waste collection?
Do you think these proposed rates and
dimensions will support your waste
collection needs?
7
Page 40 of 132
Methodology
Online Survey
An online survey was hosted on the “Let’s Chat Langford”
platform from June 20 to July 14, 2025. Respondents were
invited to provide feedback on:
• Parking and travel behaviour, including bicycle parking
and accessible parking
• Values and priorities related to off-street parking
• Proposed changes to the parking bylaw
• On-street parking challenges and opportunities (to
support the Downtown On-street Parking Strategy)
A total of 271
survey responses were received.
8
Page 41 of 132
Online Survey Results – Parking & Travel Behaviour
35.1%
32.8%
16.6%
13.3%
0.7%
0.7%
How many privately-owned vehicles (cars, vans, trucks,
motorcycles, etc.) does your household own or lease?
Two
One
Three
Four or more
None
Prefer not to say
What We Learned
Most respondents own or lease 1 -2
privately owned vehicles, which are
primarily parked in a personal
driveway or garage.
Very few respondents park their
personal vehicle solely on the street.
Less than half of all respondents
reported to be aware of all public
parking lots in downtown Langford.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
In my driveway/garage
I have a dedicated parking space/s at my building
Both on-street and off-street
On-street (parking on the road in front of your house or on adjacent side
roads)
I do not require vehicle parking at my home
62.7%
17.0%
11.8%
4.1%
1.5%
When you park at home, where do you primarily park your vehicle(s)?
36.2%
31.0%
24.4%
8.1%
Are you aware of the public parking lots in
downtown Langford?
Yes
Some of them
No
Unsure
9
Page 42 of 132
Online Survey Results – Parking & Travel Behaviour
What We
Learned
The top three vehicle-
related parking
challenges include (1)
vehicles parking on
residential streets for
long periods, (2) finding
available parking in
downtown Langford,
and (3) people who
don’t live in the area
park on residential
streets.
Almost 25% of
respondents indicated
that they do not
experience any parking
challenges in Langford.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Vehicles are parking on residential streets for long periods
It is hard to find available parking in downtown Langford
People who don’t live in the area park on residential streets
It is hard to find available parking at or near (within a block of) my destination in
other parts of the city
I do not experience any parking challenges in Langford
Parking areas or lots are lacking comfortable sidewalks to my destination
Other (please specify)
There is a lack of charging stations for electric vehicles
There are not enough accessible parking stalls near my destination
I have to pay to park my vehicle at my apartment/condo building
34.7%
34.3%
28.8%
28.0%
24.0%
19.9%
15.5%
10.7%
8.5%
3.7%
What are the main vehicle related parking challenges you experience in Langford? Select up
to 3 responses.
10
Page 43 of 132
Online Survey Results – Accessible Parking
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
I do not require accessible parking stalls
Accessible parking stalls are always occupied
I do not experience any challenges with accessible parking stalls
Access to the parking stall is often blocked due to parked vehicles or
other obstacles such as snow or construction
I am not always aware of where accessible parking stalls are located
Not enough van-accessible parking stalls for larger vehicles
The route to/from accessible parking stalls is often inaccessible, blocked
or obstructed
Other (please specify)
Accessible parking stalls are too far from my destination for my ability
and/or comfort to travel after parking
Access aisles are too small or narrow to use a wheelchair lift or ramp
(see diagram for clarification)
63.5%
6.3%
5.9%
4.8%
4.4%
3.7%
3.7%
3.0%
2.2%
1.8%
If you use accessible parking stalls, have you experienced any of the following
challenges? Select up to 3 responses.
What We Learned
Most respondents indicated
that they do not require
accessible parking stalls.
For those that utilize
accessible parking stalls, the
top challenge was reported to
be accessible parking stalls
always being occupied and
therefore not being available.
The second highest response
was that no challenges are
experienced in using
accessible parking stalls.
11
Page 44 of 132
Online Survey Results – Commercial Parking
14.5%
85.5%
Do you own a business in Langford?
Yes No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Yes
No
It depends/ every day is different
Other (please specify)
43.6%
25.6%
15.4%
15.4%
Do your customers typically experience challenges finding
vehicle parking near your business?
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Yes
Other (please specify)
No
It depends/every day is different
37.5%
25.0%
21.9%
15.6%
Do your staff typically experience challenges finding vehicle parking
near your business?
What We Learned
Only 15% of respondents
reported to own a business in
Langford.
Of those business owners,
almost half (44%) indicated
that their customers typically
experience challenges finding
vehicle parking, whereas
15% identified that every day
is different.
Customers were reported to
experience more challenges
finding vehicle parking (44%)
compared to staff (38%).
12
Page 45 of 132
Online Survey Results – Proposed Changes to the Parking Bylaw
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
I do not support removing minimum parking requirements at all
I support removing minimum parking requirements downtown where there are
transportation alternatives available (cycling, walking/rolling, transit, carsharing)
I support removing minimum parking requirements city-wide
Other (please specify)
I do not understand what removing minimum parking requirements means
I have no preference
49.8%
19.2%
12.9%
7.7%
5.2%
2.6%
What is your level of support for removing minimum parking requirements in Langford?
What We Learned
Most respondents (54%) support designating parking requirements by Land Use Designation. Respondents were provided with a
description of the Land Use Designations as per the new Official Community Plan.
13
Page 46 of 132
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
I support designating parking requirements by Land Use Designation
I do not support designating parking requirements by Land Use Designation – I
believe parking requirements should be the same across the city
I do not understand what designating parking requirements by Land Use
Designation means
Other (please specify)
I have no preference
54.6%
14.0%
14.0%
7.7%
6.6%
Do you support setting different parking requirements by Land Use Designation based on the type, size, and location of the
development, and its proximity to other transportation options?
Online Survey Results – Proposed Changes to the Parking Bylaw
What We Learned
Half of all respondents do not support removing parking minimums.
14
Page 47 of 132
Online Survey Results – Proposed Changes to the Parking Bylaw
What We Learned
When asked about which
factors respondents would
support to reduce parking
requirements, the top
responses (besides that they
do not support reduced off-
street parking requirements)
included (1) new
development being close to
transit routes, (2) close to
areas with a range of shops
and services, and (3) if
developments are close to
active transportation options.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
I do not support reduced off-street parking requirements
It’s close to transit routes
It’s close to an area with a range of shops and services
It’s close to active transportation options (bike lanes, sidewalks, …
Safe and secure bicycle parking are provided on-site
Free or discounted transit passes are provided to…
Car-share vehicles are provided on-site
It’s an affordable housing development
Other (please specify)
It’s a rental housing development
47.6%
38.0%
32.1%
30.3%
26.2%
24.7%
22.9%
15.9%
8.5%
7.4%
Which factors would you support as reasons to reduce parking requirements for new
development? Select all that apply.
15
Page 48 of 132
Online Survey Results – Bicycle Parking
26.9%
23.2%
18.1%
17.0%
14.0%
0.4%
How many bicycles does your household own?
None
Two
Four or more
Three
One
Prefer not to say
63.5%
28.8%
4.4%
3.3%
What type of bicycles does your household own? Select
all that apply.
Standard
Electric
Other (please specify)
Over-sized or cargo
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Lack of secure bicycle parking facilities (fear of theft)
I don’t experience any challenges with bicycle parking in Langford
Not enough bicycle parking
Lack of weather protection for parked bicycles
Bicycle parking is in inconvenient locations
Other (please specify)
Lack of supporting amenities (tire pumps, tools)
Bicycle parking spaces are not large enough to accommodate…
Lack of access to charging facilities for e-bikes / e-scooters
Lack of access to shower and change rooms at my destination
35.4%
31.7%
19.9%
16.6%
11.8%
10.3%
5.9%
4.8%
4.1%
3.7%
Do you experience any of the following challenges with bicycle parking in Langford? Select up to 3
responses.
What We Learned
Just over a 25% of all respondents’
households do not own a bicycle.
Almost three quarters (72%) own at
least one.
Of those households that own a
bicycle, most own a standard
bicycle, with 29% owning an electric
bike.
The main challenge experienced in
finding bicycle parking is a fear of
theft, followed by not enough
bicycle parking. The second highest
response is that respondents don’t
experience any challenges with bike
parking in Langford.
16
Page 49 of 132
Online Survey Results – Demographics
93.4%
60.9%
37.6%
3.0%
2.2%
0.7%
What is your relationship to Langford?
Live in Langford
Access shopping, recreation, or other activity in Langford
Work in Langford
Go to grade school in Langford (elementary or high school)
Other (please specify)
Go to a post secondary school in Langford
27.5%
17.0%
10.5%
9.3%
8.5%
7.7%
7.7%
7.7%
4.0%
What neighbourhood do you live in?
City Centre
South Langford
Langford Lake and Glen Lake
Westhills
North Langford
Bear Mountain
Thetis & Millstream
Mill Hill
Goldstream Meadows
60.5%
17.7%
13.3%
3.7%
2.6%
1.5%
What type of housing structure do you live in?
Single detached house or duplex
Apartment/Condo
Townhouse/Row house
Prefer not to answer
Suite in a house
Other (please specify)
What We Learned
Majority of respondents live in
Langford (93%). Respondents
also mostly access Langford for
shopping, recreation or other
activities (61%) or for work
(38%).
City Centre was the most
common neighbourhood to live
in among respondents (28%),
followed by South Langford and
Langford Lake and Glen Lake.
Few respondents live in
Goldstream Meadows (4%).
Most respondents live in a single
detached house or duplex,
followed by an apartment or
condo building (18%).
17
Page 50 of 132
Focus Groups Results
Residential Parking + TDM:
• General support for setting ratios by land
use designation with consideration for
bedrooms/unit size
• General support for lowering/removing
parking requirements as long as
alternative modes of transportation are a
viable option in the city
• Off-street parking requirements also need
to balance the needs of on-street parking
and how the city could best manage that
• Support for removal of affordable housing
parking requirements
• TDM flexibility is preferred.
Having rigid TDM
requirements can impact both
the viability of the
development itself and result
in TDM failing if the
surrounding transportation
network cannot support it
• Enforcement of TDM
measures is equally if not
more important than securing
TDM itself
• Removing minimum parking
requirements does not mean
zero parking. Developers still
need to provide parking to
meet clientele / market need.
Therefore, the costs of TDM
requirements need to be
carefully considered
18
Page 51 of 132
Focus Groups Results
Commercial Parking:
• General support for setting ratios by land
use designation
• General support for more flexible parking
ratios / removing requirements in the City
Centre
• Strong opposition against parking
maximums
• Important to ensure accessible parking is
provided in new commercial
developments
19
Page 52 of 132
Focus Groups Results
Loading:
• Flexibility is preferred. Being prescriptive
on loading needs is restrictive as each
business/use has different loading needs
• Having high clearance requirements is
especially burdensome and impacts site
design and floor plates
• Prefer on-street loading where possible
• With loading, we need to ask
the question: what is the
problem we are trying to
solve? A lot of loading activity
occurs on street so we need
to think carefully about
whether any off-street
loading should be required
• Some larger commercial
developments typically
require loading off-street
whereas the loading needs
for multi-family residential
developments are usually
accommodated on-street
• Waste collection is a large
part of the loading
requirements for both
commercial and residential
developments. The City
should be working closely
with developers early in the
process to ensure that a
waste collection strategy is
being considered
20
Page 53 of 132
Key Takeaways
Parking requirements by land use
designation are supported by both the
public and interest holders.
Non-residents parking on residential
streets, and for long periods of time, is a
key parking challenge identified.
Finding available parking in
Downtown Langford is another key
parking challenge identified. However, only
30% of respondents indicated to be aware of
the downtown public parking lots.
Removing parking minimums city-
wide is not supported. However,
interest holders are supportive of removing
parking minimums in the City Centre.
A lack of secure bicycle parking is a
main bicycling challenge in Langford.
Flexibility is preferred among the
development community for
transportation demand management and
loading requirements.
21
Page 54 of 132
Key Takeaways
22
Page 55 of 132
t 250.478.7882
e administration@langford.ca
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford, BC V9B 2X8
Staff Report to Council
DATE: Monday, December 15, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Engineering
SUBJECT: Options for Better Waste Management
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report is in response to Council’s direction to explore options to better manage waste collection in
Langford, as given at their regular meeting held on July 21, 2025. Staff collected and compared data,
assessed the current challenges and limitations, conducted reviews and research, and explored the
three main options for a residential curbside garbage collection service for properties of 1 to 4 units
inclusive. Staff recommend proceeding with the municipally-contracted option, subject to consultant
verification and public engagement. For public waste receptacles, staff recommend keeping them in the
Roads Maintenance Contract with an increased level-of-service and consistent design going forward.
Staff are seeking Council direction on the following four key recommendations aimed at improving
waste management services in Langford:
1. Increase the maximum level of service for public waste receptacle collection from 7 to 14 times
per week, at the current contract unit rate, with no seasonal restrictions;
2. Adopt the proposed new style of waste receptacle and retrofit options to reduce wildlife
attraction, discourage illegal dumping, and for asset consistency going forward;
3. Engage a consultant to:
a. Review and verify the staff recommendation to proceed with a municipally-contracted
residential curbside garbage collection service;
b. Advise and support the public survey and key partner engagement conducted by staff;
c. If verified, prepare and present a proposed scope for the Municipal Garbage Service
Contract to Council for information prior to going to tender; and
4. Prepare a bylaw to regulate the storage, collection, and disposal of garbage and organic waste in
accordance with the CRD’s Solid Waste Management Plan.
In combination, these recommendations provide immediate and long-term solutions to the growing
concerns from residents and visitors regarding overflowing public bins, dumping of household waste,
environmental protection, and the impact on roads, neighborhoods, and businesses.
Page 56 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 2 of 17
BACKGROUND:
On July 21, 2025, Council passed the following motion, directing staff to explore options to better
manage waste collection in Langford:
WHEREAS the City of Langford does not operate a municipal garbage collection service, for
residential and commercial pick up; waste collection is currently managed by private
contractors and is non-mandatory;
AND WHEREAS overflowing garbage cans in public and shared spaces contribute to health
risks, unsightliness, and negative environmental impacts;
AND WHEREAS improperly managed waste can attract wildlife, including bears, posing risks
to both public safety and animal welfare;
AND WHEREAS residents and visitors have raised concerns about litter accumulation and
inadequate waste management in high-traffic areas;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council direct staff to prepare a report outlining
potential options to address and reduce overflowing garbage cans in public areas, including
but not limited to:
• A data comparison of overflowing public waste receptacles over the past 5 years’;
• Assessing the current maintenance and servicing of public waste receptacles in parks,
streetscapes, and transit stops;
• Reviewing potential partnerships with private waste service providers or
supplementing with City staff to enhance collection in key locations;
• Options for an interim increase in level of service for existing public waste receptacles;
• Options for an increase in quantity or capacity/design change for public waste
receptacles and recycling bins to reduce wildlife attraction and discourage the illegal
practice of dumping household waste;
• Considering public awareness or signage initiatives to encourage responsible waste
disposal and to minimize wildlife encounters;
• Supporting community-level pride and responsibility through education, volunteer
programs, or beautification campaigns, in partnership with community organizations;
and
• Exploring enhanced enforcement options, such as increased bylaw presence, fines for
illegal dumping or littering, and signage to support compliance.
AND THAT Council direct staff to explore options for a municipal waste management
service, grant funding or regional collaboration opportunities, and report back with
recommendations for short-term improvements and long-term strategies that support
greater solid-waste diversion and reduction.
Page 57 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 3 of 17
COMMENTARY:
Below, staff expand on the recommended options for better waste management at a high-level,
focusing on the source of the issue and some key factors that lead to the recommendations. The report
then takes a deeper dive into the data, assessments, and research that support the recommendations.
1. Overflowing Public Garbage Cans
The impetus of the motion for exploring options to better manage waste collection in Langford was the
noticeable increase in overflowing public waste receptacles in the downtown core in the spring/summer
of 2025. Staff and the City’s maintenance contractor (the Contractor) have investigated the contents of
some of the overflowing public waste receptacles. The observation was a combination of dumping of
household waste (e.g. grocery bags, cardboard boxes, large plastic trays, kitchen scraps, tin cans, glass
jars, paper towels, wood boards, etc.) and an increase in regular handheld public waste (e.g. single use
to-go containers, coffee cups, doggie bags, plastic drink bottles, aluminum drink cans, etc.).
The City has added an average of 13 public waste receptacles per year over the past 5 years (see Section
8 for the 5-year data comparison) but has not increased the maximum level-of-service, as it was not
necessary until now. Staff and the Contractor work together to regularly adjust the level-of-service
within the limits of the Roads Maintenance Contract (the Contract). The City’s Contractor is doing a good
job servicing existing receptacles to the maximum limit of the Contract and have confirmed that they
have the capacity to take on more. The Contractor has proactively installed a FOB system on the City’s
public waste receptacles to accurately track collection data with GPS locating.
The problem is two-fold, the first problem is that the demand on public waste receptacles has exceeded
the current Contract limit for servicing them and the demand is not likely to subside. With the continued
increase in population, density, businesses, institutions, and transit, the number of pedestrians in the
downtown core is expected to continue to increase and therefore the demand on public waste
receptacles as well. However, while the issue may feel isolated to the downtown core, the map of
instances of overflowing garbage cans in Appendix A shows that this is a city-wide problem. Currently,
the range in level-of-service for any public waste receptacle in Langford is a minimum pickup of once per
week (weekly), to a maximum of seven pickups per week (daily); see Section 6 for more information. It
should also be noted that the daily pick-up option within the Contract is only during the months of April
to September inclusive.
Staff, in collaboration with the Contractor, are recommending increasing the maximum level-of-service
for public waste receptacle collection from 7 to 14 times per week (from daily to twice-daily), at the
current contract unit rate. It is also recommended that Council authorize the Director of Engineering to
adjust public waste receptacle collection frequency on any route, in any month, to override the seasonal
restrictions in the Contract. These two recommendations alone will allow staff and the Contractor to
effectively manage waste volumes as they fluctuate.
Page 58 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 4 of 17
2. Dumping of Household Waste
The second problem is the misuse of the public waste receptacles for dumping of household waste. A
garbage can is considered overflowing both when the garbage is overtopping the bin and when there is
more garbage placed beside or around the receptacle than can fit in the bag at the time of pickup. While
the design of a public waste receptacle is important for the many reasons (as explained in Section 7 of
this commentary), it will never stop someone from simply placing a full bag of household garbage beside
the bin. The question is, why are residents dumping household waste and how can we stop it?
Langford does not currently operate a municipal garbage collection service. Waste pickup is instead
managed by private contractors on an open-market basis. Residents may independently subscribe to
one of several private hauling firms for curbside trash and organics collection. The non-mandatory
nature of arranging private garbage collection for every household can result in residents choosing not
to enter into a private contract. This can then result in dumping of residential waste in public or
commercial bins. While this may only apply to a small number of residents, repetitive dumping can have
a negative impact on the neighbourhood.
3. Municipal Waste Management Options
As the City continues to grow, Council has directed staff to evaluate whether a more coordinated,
controlled, and unified approach to waste management is needed. When comparing the option of
developing an in-house residential waste collection service against the option of contracting out this
service, the feasibility and timelines associated with the contracting option outweighed the benefits of
an in-house service. It was also determined that a municipally-contracted residential curbside garbage
collection service would best align with how the City of Langford operates. It is model that the City is
familiar with and does not require significant up-front capital investment.
Through research, staff found that residents in Langford are likely paying more annually on average for a
private garbage collection service, compared to other municipalities in B.C. that either have a
municipally managed or contracted bi-weekly garbage collection service with added benefits (large item
pick-up days, yard waste, etc.). The option of a municipally-contracted service will provide most of the
benefits of an in-house service, and staff could have a Request for Proposal (RFP) issued and contract
awarded within the next 8 months, with a transition and onboarding period for the residents and the
service provider thereafter. Having a municipally-contracted residential curbside garbage collection
service is the recommended solution for residential curbside waste management in Langford.
While a considerable amount of research was completed by staff to support this recommendation, staff
recognize that there is more work to be done. Staff recommend engaging an experienced consultant to
review and verify the staff recommendation to proceed with a municipally-contracted residential
curbside garbage collection service. As part of the verification process, staff recommend conducting
public and key partner engagement, advised and supported by the consultant.
If Council would like to proceed with going to tender for a sole service provider, the City will need the
consultant to draft the RFP and contract. The consultant will be directed to take into consideration
feasibility, phasing, and “what we heard” from the public and key partners. Staff would ensure that the
Page 59 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 5 of 17
scope of the Municipal Garbage Service Contract would be brought forward to Council for information
prior to going to tender.
4. B.C. Municipal Waste Management Service Comparison
Below is a comparison of private (P), municipal (M), and municipally-contracted (MC) garbage collection
services offered in each municipality in the Capital Regional District (CRD), as well as select comparable
municipalities up-island and on the lower mainland of B.C.
Table 1: B.C. Municipal Waste Management Service Comparison*
Municipality
Population
(2021 Census,
rounded to
nearest 500)
Garbage
Yard & Garden Waste
Food
Waste
Collection
Drop
off
Collection
Drop off
Langford**
46,500
P
P
P
P
Colwood
20,000
P
P
M
P
Sooke
15,000
P
P
P
P
Central
Saanich
17,500
P
P
P
P
North Saanich
12,000
P
P
M for a fee
P
Metchosin
5,000
P
P
P
Highlands
2,500
P
P
P
View Royal
11,500
MC – Waste
Management
MC
MC – Ellice
Recycle
MC – Ellice
Recycle
MC
Sidney
12,500
MC - Emterra
MC -
Emterra
MC -
Emterra
Oak Bay
18,000
M
M
M
M
MC - GFL
Saanich
117,500
M
M
M
M
Victoria
92,000
M
M
M
M
Esquimalt
18,500
M
M
M
M
Nanaimo
100,000
MC by RDN –
WCC
MC – WCC
P
MC by RDN
– WCC
Parksville
13,500
MC by RDN –
WCC
MC by RDN
– WCC
M (branches
annually)
P
MC by RDN
– WCC
Qualicum
Beach
9,500
MC by RDN –
WCC
MC by RDN
– WCC
P
MC by RDN
– WCC
Lantzville
4,000
MC by RDN –
WCC
MC by RDN
– WCC
P
MC by RDN
– WCC
Courtenay
28,500
MC – Emterra
MC –
Emterra
M –
Seasonal
excess only
MC –
Emterra
Page 60 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 6 of 17
Legend: P = Private, M = Municipal, MC = Municipally-Contracted, RDN = Regional District of Nanaimo
*Data was compiled from individual municipality websites and the CRD’s “Collection Services in Your Area” webpage, available
at https://www.crd.ca/programs-services/garbage-recycling/collection-services-your-area
**Langford currently has an estimate population of 58,000 to 60,000 (2025)
This data demonstrates that the majority of municipalities with a population of 20,000 or more, have
some level of control or involvement in garbage collection, whether it be a service run directly by the
municipality or under a municipal contract.
Practically speaking, it will become increasingly more inefficient to have multiple garbage companies
servicing the same street as the population increases. If there is no coordination between companies,
this means that there may be garbage cans out on the street overnight several days in a bi-weekly
period. This could attract more wildlife and rodents than if the garbage cans were only out once every
two weeks on any singular street. Also, overlapping routes between multiple companies likely means
more fuel consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, traffic congestion, and wear and tear on the
road network. For these reasons and more explained in this report, it is recommended that the City
proceed with a municipally-contracted residential curbside garbage collection service (subject to
consultant verification).
Municipality
Population
(2021 Census,
rounded to
nearest 500)
Garbage
Yard & Garden Waste
Food
Waste
Collection
Drop
off
Collection
Drop off
Comox
15,000
MC – Emterra
MC –
Emterra
P
MC –
Emterra
Port Coquitlam
61,500
M
M
M
North
Vancouver
58,000
M
M
M
Maple Ridge
91,000
P
P/M – brush
chipping
only
P
West
Vancouver
44,000
M
M
M
Langley
29,000
MC – Emterra
MC –
Emterra
MC –
Emterra
Port Moody
33,500
M
M
M
Page 61 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 7 of 17
5. Waste Management Model Comparison
The following table summarizes the three main models for managing residential curbside garbage
collection followed by an expanded explanation of each model.
Table 2: Waste Management Model Comparison
Model Description
Capital
Investment
Estimated
Annual Cost
per Residence
Oversight
Road Network &
Enviro. Impact
a. Individual
Private Contracts
(Status Quo)
All residential
and commercial
properties hire
private haulers
individually.
None Up to ~$560 Minimal
Multiple trucks;
traffic congestion;
higher emissions;
inconsistent
coverage.
b. Municipally-
Contracted
Service
(Recommended)
City contracts
one company
for residential
properties (1 to
4 units).
None Up to ~$360 Moderate
Fewer trucks;
better diversion;
contractual
control; universal
service.
c. Municipal In-
House Service
(City-Operated
Collection)
City operates its
own collection
fleet for
residential
properties (1 to
4 units).
Significant Up to ~$380 High
Same efficiency
as above; full
control over
standards,
routing, and data.
a. Individual Private Contracts (Status Quo)
How it Works:
Residents independently subscribe to private waste haulers (such as GFL, Waste Connections Canada,
and Waste Management) for curbside garbage and organics collection, with each household selecting its
preferred provider, service frequency, and bin size.
Costs:
Residents pay monthly or quarterly fees directly to private companies. Typical rates in the region vary
from contract-to-contract depending on bin size and pickup frequency. Staff’s research shows that
households may pay up to $560 annually for garbage, green bin, and yard waste. However, households
with very low waste can choose infrequent service or opt out entirely, incurring little or no cost, while
those requiring regular weekly pickup pay the highest amounts. There is no direct cost to the City for
continuing residential collection under this status quo; all operational costs are borne by residents and
private haulers.
Page 62 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 8 of 17
Table 3: Individual Private Contracts (Status Quo)
Pros
Cons
•
Maximum choice for residents:
Households select service frequency,
bin size, and provider to suit their
needs and budget.
• No direct cost to the City: Municipal
funds are not used for residential
garbage collection.
• Competitive market: More market
competition may keep prices
reasonable but that is not
guaranteed.
•
Lack of universal service: Some
households are choosing not to be
serviced or to be under-serviced,
which may increase the likelihood of
illegal dumping and overflowing
public bins. Clean up of the dumped
garbage is an increased cost to the
City.
• Inconsistent standards: Service
quality and coverage vary; the City
does not enforce uniform standards
or pricing.
• Environmental impact: Multiple
trucks from different companies
increase noise, greenhouse gas
emissions, and road wear.
• Limited control: The City cannot
easily promote consistent garbage
diversion or organics participation,
nor collect data to track waste
reduction goals.
• Traffic impact: More trucks than
necessary stopping on the road to
collect garbage at the curbside,
causing more congestion.
b. Municipally-Contracted Service (Recommended)
How it Works:
The City would tender and contract a residential curbside garbage collection service for all single-family
homes, including suites, and some townhomes or other stratas up to 4 units inclusive, to align with the
CRD/Recycle BC model. Residents would no longer arrange individual garbage pickup; instead, the City
ensures every eligible residence in the program is covered under one contract. The contracted service
would include garbage collection and organics (green bin) collection; recycling would continue through
CRD/Recycle BC. This model is essentially a municipally administered service delivered by a sole service
provider.
Costs:
All eligible households would now pay for garbage service through the program, ensuring full
participation. Based on similar contracts in other BC municipalities, the cost per household is expected
to be approximately $25–$30 per month for weekly garbage and organics collection. This equates to
$300–$360 per year per home for comprehensive service. For reference, a recent waste study in Central
Page 63 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 9 of 17
Saanich projected about $27/month per household for a single-hauler contract covering garbage and
organics.
Households that previously paid very little (or nothing) for infrequent service would see their costs
increase to the standard fee, while many others might pay about the same or less than they did under
an individual private contract. The contracted municipal garbage service costs would be either billed
directly to residents by the contractor, or residents would pay the City. If the City does the billing for this
service, it would need to be determined how that billing will be done (i.e. billing with property taxes or
separate billing).
Table 4: Municipally-Contracted Service (Recommended)
Pros
Cons
• Universal service coverage: Every eligible
household receives regular curbside
collection, reducing illegal dumping and
strain on public bins.
• Efficiency and lower emissions: One
hauler means fewer trucks on the road,
reducing noise, greenhouse gas
emissions, and road wear.
• City control over standards: The City sets
service standards, contract terms, and
can enforce performance, ensuring
consistent quality.
• Improved data and oversight: The City
can require the contractor to provide
data (e.g., tonnage, usage rates),
supporting waste reduction and climate
goals.
• No capital outlay for trucks and land:
The City leverages the contractor’s
resources, avoiding the need to purchase
its own fleet and facility/land.
• Ease of disposal: Could include large item
pickups a few times per year as part of
the service to allow residents to dispose
of bulky items (furniture, appliances,
mattresses) without having to visit the
landfill.
• Required participation: Households
cannot select their provider or service
frequency, but may have a choice in bin
size depending on the contract terms.
• Administrative burden: The City may
manage billing, customer support, bin
distributions, and contract oversight,
requiring additional staff effort.
• Potential cost increases: All households
bear the cost, including those who
previously opted out or paid for minimal
service.
• Reliance on contractor: If the chosen
hauler performs poorly or costs rise at
renewal, the City must address issues
through contract management or re-
tendering.
• Less flexibility than in-house: Changes to
service details require contract
amendments, which may be slower than
internal adjustments.
Page 64 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 10 of 17
c. Municipal In-House Service (City-Operated Collection)
How it Works:
The City would create its own waste collection service within the City’s public works (or a new utilities
department). The City would purchase garbage trucks, hire drivers and support staff, and directly collect
garbage and organics from all residential homes. This is the traditional fully public model: City crews
perform the work, and the City handles all aspects from billing to operations. Langford would join other
Vancouver Island municipalities like Victoria, Saanich, and Esquimalt that run their own garbage fleets.
Costs:
Under municipal operation, the City needs to cover all costs of the service – labour, equipment, fuel,
maintenance, billing, customer service, etc. Those costs would be recovered through utility fees or taxes
from residents; the service could be set up as a self-funded utility or part of general property taxes.
Based on studies and other cities’ budgets, the ongoing operating cost works out similarly to the
contracted scenario: $26–$28 per household per month for weekly garbage and organics service. For
example, an analysis for Central Saanich estimated about $26.75/month per home for a municipal-run
service (vs $27.06 for contracted) when spread over all households. It is unknown whether or not the
capital recovery costs were considered in this estimate.
The City would likely charge each residence approximately $320–$380 per year for the service to cover
ongoing operating expenses. However, in addition to these operating costs, the City would face
significant upfront capital costs in this model, for which the customers would be billed on top of the
annual operating costs. For this model, the following would be required:
• Fleet trucks:
• Approximately 3-6 trucks (at a cost between 400k-500k per truck for a total upward of
$3.0million)
• Staff:
• Staff would be required to operate trucks, manage fleet, maintain fleet, billing,
customer support, management and human resources
• Land and Buildings:
• Purchase or lease land for operations and facilities
• Build, buy, or lease a facility to house trucks and for repairs, washrooms, and breaks
• Fuel station (could use cardlock system instead)
• Standardized Bins:
• Garbage/Organics carts ~19,000 households x $100-150 per cart ($2.85million)
The City would need to invest money upfront (or take on debt) to acquire assets, then amortize those
costs over time. Once established, the City-run service’s annual costs (including debt repayment on
capital and all staffing) would need to be covered by the collected fees. All financial risk is on the City to
manage the service efficiently within the fee structure.
Page 65 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 11 of 17
Table 5: Municipal In-House Service (City-Operated Collection)
Pros
Cons
• City control over standards: Full control
over service standards, schedules, and
responsiveness.
• Accountability: Direct accountability to
residents; no third-party contractor
buffer.
• Climate Actions: Ability to align service
with climate and waste-diversion goals.
• Cost Recovery: Long-term cost savings
may be possible (no profit margin; cost
recovery model) but not guaranteed.
• More Flexibility: Flexibility to adjust
service details without contract
renegotiation.
• Improved data and oversight: Better
data collection for planning and reporting
(e.g. diversion rates, GHG).
• Innovation: Ability Potential to pilot
innovations (e.g. electric trucks, seasonal
pickups).
• Cost: High upfront capital investment
(trucks, bins, staffing, land) and could be
more costly to the residents annually.
• Complex: Increased operational
complexity and administrative burden.
• Risk: City bears all risks (equipment
failure, labor issues, cost overruns).
• More staff: Requires a multitude of new
staff roles and an increase in
management, finance, and human
resources capacity.
• Long process: Slower to scale or pivot
compared to contracted service.
6. Summary of Current Maintenance Practices for Public Waste Receptacles and Litter
The City currently contracts out the maintenance of all public waste receptacles through the Roads
Maintenance Contract, which currently includes servicing 244 garbage cans across parks, streetscapes,
and transit stops.
Under the terms of the contract, public waste receptacles are serviced at one of three fixed frequencies:
• Once (1) per week
• Three (3) times per week
• Seven (7) times per week (daily)*
*Daily service from April 1
st
to September 30
th
only
In addition, the following public waste receptacles maintenance services are also included in the
contract:
• Graffiti removal from garbage cans
• Annual power wash of garbage cans
• Clean-up of garbage overflowing from bin at time of pickup, at an additional overflow rate
As previously stated, overflowing receptacles are a common recurring issue, particularly in areas with
high pedestrian activity or where receptacles are misused for household waste. When receptacles
overflow outside of scheduled pickups, the garbage collection falls outside of the maintenance contract
Page 66 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 12 of 17
(non-contract). Non-contract work orders to service overflowing public waste receptacles cost
approximately 10 times the contractor-discovered overflow rates in the contract because the contractor
has to go out of their way or off the route to service it. While it is good to have this option for one-off
situations, it should not be used regularly due to the associated costs and impact on operations.
The City’s maintenance contractor, beautification workers, and volunteers regularly conduct litter picks
in the downtown core. Removal of larger household items dumped on boulevards and streets, such as
furniture and appliances, is done by the City’s contractor via non-contract work order. The City also
returns items such as shopping carts to businesses and maintains BC Transit bus stops on a rotating
basis.
The City partners with the Greater Victoria Green Team several times per year to engage the community
for litter clean up events to remove loose garbage from sidewalk and boulevard areas in downtown
Langford. In 2024, three litter clean up events were held, a total of 87 community members
participated, with a total of 277 hours contributed to cleaning up the City. Based on participant tracking,
255 lbs of litter was collected.
The City also partners with the Bilston Watershed Habitat Protection Association on creek clean up
efforts. In 2024, volunteers completed an Earth Day clean up of Firehall Creek, fish survey and flow
monitoring assessment of Bilston Creek mainstem, and replanting of native vegetation along a section of
Pritchard Creek. Volunteers also completed creek assessments and identification of environmental
concerns. New fish habitat signs were also installed along Pritchard and Firehall Creeks.
Additionally, the City's collaboration with organizations like Wild Wise and WildSafe BC demonstrates a
commitment to evidence-based programming. These partnerships allow for scalable outreach from
door-to-door canvassing to school presentations and ensure that signage is relevant to local wildlife
risks.
7. Public Education, Signage, and Campaigns
Several public education programs and signage efforts are already in place or under consideration:
• “No Household Dumping” Stickers: Placed on public garbage cans around Langford to
discourage misuse.
• Wildlife Awareness Signage: Includes “Lock it up, it’s the law” and “Bear in Area” signs
developed by Wild Wise, an educational society funded by the City with $2,500 grants in both
2024 and 2025.
• Bin Tagging (WildSafe BC): Coordinators place removable stickers on bins set out too early,
educating residents about bylaws and wildlife attractants without issuing fines.
• Digital Outreach: The City maintains a “Bear Aware” page on its website and social media
platforms to reinforce messaging.
Please, refer to Appendix B for more information on existing signage campaigns and resources.
Page 67 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 13 of 17
To continue to support community-level pride, some initiatives that could be developed by the City
include but are not limited to:
• Develop a catchphrase style public-relations campaign, focused on collectively keeping our
community clean and not leaving a mess for others to clean up
• Community education through City’s website, social media, and digital advertising boards
• Create educational video reels in conjunction with subject matter experts
• Host a downtown Langford street clean-up day in conjunction with the Chamber of Commerce
• Work with students at Belmont High School to lead awareness initiatives with youth
• Work with developers and realtors to include pamphlets in new home buyer packages
• “Adopt A” street, area, or park opportunity
• Help spread awareness of CRD “What Goes Where” tool through the City’s website/social media
8. Garbage Can Capacity, Design, and Enforcement
Increasing garbage can capacity is challenging, as larger loads throughout the day may require additional
personnel or equipment. Also, existing cans are not able to accommodate larger inserts and therefore a
new can style with larger capacity would need to be considered. Potential solutions to increase garbage
can capacity are:
• Retrofitting suitable existing cans to install front-loading lids, to prevent piling of dumped
garbage atop of cans and restrict wildlife access, such as birds and racoons.
• Retrofitting existing cans with recycling racks for returnable beverage containers to divert some
materials from the landfill.
• Install larger capacity cans with in-ground storage in suitable locations. Emptying of in-ground
cans would likely be at an additional cost to the City, as special equipment would be required.
• Select a standard garbage can for future installations with a smaller opening to discourage
dumping of bagged household garbage in public receptacles.
Please, refer to Appendix B for a review of current waste receptacles in Langford, as well as the
recommended standard garbage can design and retrofit options with associated costs.
Currently, an offence for dumping garbage in an open place is a $500.00 fine. The greatest enforcement
challenge is identifying the source of the dumped garbage, as it is rare that there is evidence or
witnesses that can point them to an individual. Additional staffing or increased fines would not be
effective solutions as the dumping is still unlikely to be observed by a Bylaw Officer. Bylaw updates for
increased enforcement can be considered in the future, if necessary.
9. Five-Year Data Comparison of Overflow Incidents
Over the past year, the City has experienced a notable increase in the frequency of overflowing public
waste receptacles and the associated servicing costs. This trend has been documented through
contractor reports, internal work orders, and monthly service invoices. A summary of the data showing
increasing overflows and servicing fees is demonstrated in the following tables and corresponding
graphs. A map showing instances of overflowing garbage cans is attached in Appendix A.
Page 68 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 14 of 17
Table 6: Garbage Can Cost Summary (Excluding GST), 2020-2025
Year
Annual
Garbage
Pickup
Contract
Rate
1
Number
of
Garbage
Cans
Added
Annual
Operating
Garbage
Budget
Outside of
Contract
Actual Annual
Expenditures
for Garbage
(Operating
Budget)
Annual
Overflowing
Can Cost
2
Total
Overflowing
Occurrences
2020
$130,532.85
9
$35,000.00
$36,283.76
$8,552.63
861
2021
3
$139,295.63
26
$65,000.00
$62,688.35
$17,740.14
1767
2022
$207,779.11
9
$66,300.00
$92,441.34
$3,867.05
395
2023
$231,929.66
15
$67,626.00
$60,314.20
$2,057.51
175
2024
$260,050.78
10
$69,655.00
$107,157.59
$9,467.17
258
2025
4
$266,061.14
9
$71,400.00
$92,099.68
$27,008.20
2138
1
Rate at beginning of the year, post CPI adjustment.
2
Cost is for overflowing garbage cans only, no dumped garbage or large household items cleanup costs are included.
3
Note: Transfer of Parks garbage cans to Engineering Roads Maintenance Contract in 2021.
4
2025 data is from January to August (inclusive) only.
Table 7: Monthly Overflowing Garbage Can Pickups, 2020-2025
Year
Month
2020
2021
5
2022
2023
2024
2025
6
January
71
42
23
19
26
45
February
45
87
34
7
23
37
March
18
200
48
8
7
89
April
68
200
37
35
2
160
May
87
347
31
9
7
313
June
73
387
36
12
6
368
July
116
217
56
6
28
604
August
99
107
24
6
16
522
September
78
69
34
31
15
October
98
69
32
13
29
November
53
21
28
-
7
51
December
55
21
12
29
48
Total
861
1767
395
175
258
2138
5
Transfer of Parks garbage cans to Engineering Roads Maintenance Contract in 2021.
6
2025 data is from January to August (inclusive) only.
7
No data available for November 2023.
Page 69 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 15 of 17
Figure 1: Annual Overflowing Can Cost 2020-2025
Figure 2:
Garbage Can Overflows 2020-2025
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
If Council chooses to adopt Option 1, the estimated costs to be incorporated into 2026 portion the 5-
Year Financial Plan would be:
1. Cost to increase garbage pickup frequency: Up to $125,000
2. Cost to retrofit existing bins/install standard bins: To replace all Langford owned garbage
cans on Goldstream Avenue between Jacklin and VMP with the new recommended design,
the estimated cost would be $75,000
3. Feasibility study, RFP, and contract award: $85,000
Any long-term costs borne by the City would be advised by the consultant at the feasibility stage prior to
contract award. Further costs, if any, would be reported to Council in future staff report(s).
$-
$5,000.00
$10,000.00
$15,000.00
$20,000.00
$25,000.00
$30,000.00
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Annual Overflowing Can Cost (excluding GST)
Year
Annual Overflowing Can Cost 2020-2025
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Number of Overflowing Cans
Year
Garbage Can Overflows 2020-2025
Page 70 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 16 of 17
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:
Some residents may be on a contract for their current waste collection services and therefore may be
locked in with a single provider for the number of years specified in the contract. The City would need to
consider costs associated with severing the contracts or consider a phased transfer of services in such
circumstances.
To transition from the current private subscription model to a municipally managed garbage collection
service, whether through a single contracted hauler or a City-operated fleet, the City would need to
establish a new bylaw mandating participation of all eligible households. This bylaw would serve as the
legal foundation the service, ensuring that every eligible residence is included in the program and
subject to the same standards and fees.
The bylaw would clearly define the scope of service, outline the responsibilities of both the City and
residents, and specify enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance. Additionally, it would set rates,
determine billing methods, and require the use of standardized bins or green bins to support waste
diversion goals. Without this legislative framework, the City would lack the ability to require
participation, making it difficult to achieve the intended environmental and service improvements.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
2 - Climate Change and Environmental Stewardship.
5 - Good Governance.
6 - Quality of Life.
OPTIONS:
Option 1
THAT Council:
1. Increase the maximum level of service for public waste receptacle collection from seven (7) to
fourteen (14) times per week, at the current contract unit rate, with no seasonal restrictions;
2. Adopt the proposed new style of waste receptacle and retrofit options;
AND THAT Council direct staff to:
3. Engage a consultant to:
a. Review and verify the staff recommendation to proceed with a municipally-contracted
residential curbside garbage collection service;
b. Advise and support the public survey and key partner engagement conducted by staff;
c. If verified, prepare and present a proposed scope for the Municipal Garbage Service
Contract to Council for information prior to going to tender; and
4. Prepare a bylaw to regulate the storage, collection, and disposal of garbage and organic waste in
accordance with the CRD’s Solid Waste Management Plan.
Page 71 of 132
Options for Better Waste Management
20251215 Council Report
Page 17 of 17
OR Option 2
THAT Council approve the recommended increase in service frequency for public waste receptacles at
the discretion of the Director of Engineering and Public Works;
AND THAT Council direct staff as follows regarding the management of residential curbside garbage
collection:
a. _____________;
b. _____________;
c. __________.
SUBMITTED BY: Katelyn Balzer, P.Eng., Director of Engineering and Public Works
Concurrence: Melisa Miles, Manager of Legislative Services
Concurrence: Donna Petrie, Senior Manager of Communications & Economic Development
Concurrence: Yari Nielsen, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities
Concurrence: Leah Stohmann, RPP, MCIP, Director of Community Planning and Development
Concurrence: Michael Dillabaugh, CPA, CA, Director of Finance
Concurrence: Marie Watmough, Director of Legislative & Protective Services
Concurrence: Braden Hutchins, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Concurrence: Darren Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments: Appendix A – Map of Overflowing Garbage Cans
Appendix B – Garbage Can Examples and Education Initiatives
Page 72 of 132
1 Overflow (9 in map)
2 - 10 Overflows (92 in map)
11 - 25 Overflows (45 in map)
26 - 50 Overflows (13 in map)
51 - 107 Overflows (6 in map)
Instances of Overflowing Garbage Cans
from January to August 2025
Appendix A
Page 73 of 132
Page 1 of 25
Appendix B
Existing Garbage Bins:
The many styles of existing garbage bins around Langford were catalogued with general
information, as well as their respective advantages and disadvantages in the table below.
Table 1: Existing City of Langford Garbage Can Styles
Classic Langford Can with Crest
About:
- Common garbage can throughout the city
- Maintenance access is through an unlocked,
removable lid
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Metal
Advantages:
-Locally manufactured in Langford
- Lid opening is small
Disadvantages:
- Lid is not tethered to can and could be easily
removed, stolen, or lost
- Removeable lid allows for dumping
household/excess waste
- Can insert is small and is not utilizing the
exterior can’s full capacity
Page 74 of 132
Page 2 of 25
Classic Bear Mountain
About:
- Located in the Bear Mountain community
area
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Metal
Advantages:
- Consistent can design throughout the
community
Disadvantages:
- Garbage could be placed on top
- The opening is bigger than other styles
Page 75 of 132
Page 3 of 25
Hid-A-Bag
About:
- Located in parks and areas where wildlife is
an increased concern
- Maintenance access is through a door – the
back opens entirely
- Capacity varies
- Metal
Advantages:
- Wildlife resistant
- Lid provides some level of odour control
- Large, variable capacity
- Durable
Disadvantages:
- Large opening makes it easy to dump
household/excess waste
Pattison Outdoor Advertising
About:
- Common by bus stops, especially in the
downtown core
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Metal
Advantages:
-Cans provided and maintained by Pattison
Outdoor, a Canadian-based company
- Maintenance access is through a lockable
door
- Has a metal bonnet on top, prevents piling
of garbage on top of can
Disadvantages:
- The opening is bigger than other styles
- Can be a target for vandalism
Page 76 of 132
Page 4 of 25
Crowned
About:
- Located at Veterans Memorial Park and a
couple smaller parks on residential streets
- Maintenance access is through an unlocked,
removable lid.
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Metal
Advantages:
- Smaller can opening
Disadvantages:
- Lid is easily removed and does not prevent
depositing of dumped garbage
- Interior can is small (for some) and is not
utilizing the exterior can’s full capacity
- Garbage could be placed on top
- Can insert is visible
Page 77 of 132
Page 5 of 25
Exposed Aggregate
About:
- Two different external sizes
- Maintenance access is through an unlocked,
removable lid.
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Concrete
Advantages:
- Lid is attached to can via a chain - can't be
stolen/lost.
- Lid is easily removed for maintenance.
Disadvantages:
- Inserts are not utilizing full can space
- No preventatives for dumping
household/excess waste
- Graffiti removal is challenging
- Garbage could be placed on top
Page 78 of 132
Page 6 of 25
Faux Wood
About:
- Along Station Avenue at the Station Avenue
Cultural District
- Metal and Plastic
Advantages:
- Aesthetically appealing.
- Different styles available with sorting options
(recycling, paper/plastic)
- Maintenance access is through a lockable
door
- Lid opening is small
- Lid cannot be removed
- Multi-can style has sloped lid to discourage
piling of loose garbage on top
Page 79 of 132
Page 7 of 25
Disadvantages:
- Overflows often during community events
- Garbage could be placed on top
Utility
About:
- Maintenance access is through an unlocked,
removable lid.
- Provides power to nearby infrastructure.
- Capacity of 120L/32G
- Metal
Advantages:
- Small opening in the lid.
Photos:
Page 80 of 132
Page 8 of 25
- Lid is attached to the can via a tether – can't
be stolen/lost
Disadvantages:
- Lid is easily removed
- Large can size takes up space and does not
have significantly more capacity
Slatted
About:
- Located around the YMCA and GVPL
Langford Heritage Branch (and other
locations)
- Undetermined capacity
- Metal
Advantages:
- Maintenance access is through a lockable
door
- Lid is welded on and can't be removed
Disadvantages:
Photos:
Page 81 of 132
Page 9 of 25
- The opening is bigger than other styles
- Garbage could be placed on top
Solar/Self-Compacting
About:
- Located on Goldstream Ave. and Langford
Pkwy.
- Capacity of 120L/32G
- Metal
Advantages:
- Larger capacity as garbage is compacted
- Uses renewable energy and a battery
- Self-compacting (increased capacity)
- Encourages sorting
- Pull-door opening makes it more difficult to
dump excess waste
- Maintenance access is through a lockable
door
- Improved odour control (compared to open-
air cans)
Photos:
Page 82 of 132
Page 10 of 25
Disadvantages:
- Difficult to clean due to internal compacting
mechanisms
- Difficult to empty as compacted garbage
weighs more
- Manufacturer is outside of Canada and is
difficult to contact for replacement parts
- Target for vandalism
Victorian
Page 83 of 132
Page 11 of 25
About:
- A couple locations on Goldstream Ave.
- Maintenance access is through a lockable
door
- Capacity of 75L/20G
- Metal
Advantages:
- Made of thick metal.
- Pointed lid could resist loose garbage being
placed on top.
- Lid cannot be removed
Disadvantages:
- Access is through a lockable door, but at the
City Hall location there was no lock, and the
door could be opened easily.
- Large openings for dumped garbage
Photos:
Page 84 of 132
Page 12 of 25
Retrofit Options:
To address common concerns with the garbage cans, several options are available to retrofit the
existing garbage cans. Suitable retrofit options are included in Table 2.
Table 2: Retrofit Options for Existing City of Langford Garbage Cans
Retrofit
Option
Improvement
Applicable
Can(s)
Photo(s)
Larger
Garbage
Can Insert
Replace the existing
can insert with a
larger insert to
maximize the exterior
can’s capacity.
(Note: if the weight
will still be safe for
maintenance workers
to lift and can be lifted
out.)
- Classic
Langford
- Crowned
- Exposed
Aggregate
N/A
Garbage
Bonnet
Replace the lid with a
bonnet/rain-guard
style – or attach a
bonnet to the existing
lid – to help prevent
rain, debris, and pests
from entering the can.
(Note: could also be
used to reduce any
“free space” on top of
the flat cans that
garbage could be
placed on to.)
- Crowned
- Slatted
Page 85 of 132
Page 13 of 25
Retrofit
Option
Improvement
Applicable
Can(s)
Photo(s)
Lid with
Door
Opening
Replace the open-air
lid with a different
style to:
- Reduce the opening
size
- Deter wildlife such
as birds and raccoons
- Classic
Langford
- Crowned
- Exposed
Aggregate
Separate
Dog Bag
Garbage
Can
Add a separate dog
bag garbage next to
the cans at parks to
reduce the number of
dog bags entering the
existing cans.
Any cans
near parks/
walking
trails
Page 86 of 132
Page 14 of 25
Retrofit
Option
Improvement
Applicable
Can(s)
Photo(s)
Local
artwork
Paint the cans to
increase aesthetics
and discourage
vandalism (ex: have
them painted by a
street/mural artist).
- Exposed
Aggregate
Lid Lock
Add a lock to the lid
so it cannot be lifted
without a
key/permitted access,
and to deter wildlife.
- Classic
Langford
- Crowned
- Hydro
- Exposed
Aggregate
N/A
Garbage
Lid Tether
Add a lanyard/tether
to the lid so it can’t be
lost/stolen.
- Classic
Langford
- Crowned
- Exposed
Aggregate
Page 87 of 132
Page 15 of 25
Retrofit
Option
Improvement
Applicable
Can(s)
Photo(s)
Diverted
Waste
Replace select cans
in high-traffic areas
with larger “sorting”
cans to separate
recyclables and
garbage; or replace
with new can design
that has locking doors
and non-removable
lids.
(Note: padlocks, like
in the photo, could be
cut to access the
returnable containers
– internal locks may
be a better choice.)
Any cans
in high
traffic/
downtown
areas
Basket
Addition for
Recyclables
Add a basket for
returnable beverage
containers to the
exterior of the can to
reduce the volume of
garbage entering the
can and also
discourages digging
through the can.
- Crowned
- Slatted
- Classic
Langford
can with
Crest
- Victorian
- (Any
other
feasible
cans.)
Page 88 of 132
Page 16 of 25
Retrofit
Option
Improvement
Applicable
Can(s)
Photo(s)
Install larger
capacity
cans with
in-ground
storage
-Provides additional
in-ground storage
- Closed lid to limit
odour.
-Bear resistant
options
-Only suitable for
some locations due to
potential for utility
conflicts
-Supplied by
Canadian company
-Larger capacity of 3
cubic meters (2.4
meters deep)
-Less frequent pick
up, but can is emptied
using a crane truck as
garbage bag weight
can be up to 400 lbs.
so pick up and
garbage bags would
be at an additional
cost.
Page 89 of 132
Page 17 of 25
Recommended Future Garbage Can Design:
Based on review and evaluation of existing garbage cans as well as available retrofit options,
the recommended options to alleviate some of the common concerns are documented in Table
3.
Table 3: Recommended Garbage Can Design and Retrofit Options
Recommendation
Details
Photo
Estimated
Cost
Standard Can
Design for
Roadside
Install one
consistent
can style for
all future
installations.
Select can
style with
curved, non-
removable
lid and
smaller, front
opening
reduces
opportunities
for dumping
household
garbage or
piling
garbage on
top of can.
Install
recycling bin
at some
locations to
divert waste
from the
landfill.
$3,600 per
can
installation
Page 90 of 132
Page 18 of 25
Recommendation
Details
Photo
Estimated
Cost
Standard Can
Design for Parks
and Trails
Install one
consistent
can style for
parks or trail
areas where
wildlife
attraction is
a concern.
Select a
bear-proof
design.
$2,515 per
can
installation
(single unit)
$3,500 per
can
installation
(double unit)
Retrofit Existing
Bins with Basket
for Recyclables
Add a
basket for
returnable
beverage
containers to
the exterior
of the can to
reduce the
volume of
garbage
$200 per can
installation
Page 91 of 132
Page 19 of 25
Recommendation
Details
Photo
Estimated
Cost
entering the
can and also
discourages
digging
through the
can.
Retrofit Bins with
Front Loading
Can Lids
Replace the
flat open-air
lids with a
different
style to
reduce the
opening size
and deter
wildlife such
as birds and
raccoons.
$400 per can
installation
Install larger
capacity cans
with in-ground
storage
Consider
installing
larger-
capacity in-
ground cans
where space
and budget
permits.
$4,000 per
can
installation,
$450 per can
servicing
Page 92 of 132
Page 20 of 25
Recommendation
Details
Photo
Estimated
Cost
Page 93 of 132
Page 21 of 25
Existing Signage, Initiatives, Campaigns, and Resources:
Although many waste and urban wildlife initiatives emphasize bear awareness, the signs and
information can be adjusted to reflect any urban wildlife as needed, such as birds, rodents,
bears, or raccoons.
Table 4: Waste and Wildlife Initiative Examples
Initiative
About
Examples
Bin Tagging
(WildSafe BC)
- An educational activity run by
WildSafe Community
Coordinators that involves
placing removable stickers on
residential garbage bins that
were placed curbside the night
before collection.
- This activity is intended to
provide information about local
bylaws and to raise awareness
about wildlife attractants – it
does not enforce bylaws or
deliver fines.
- Source: Bin Tagging - WildSafe
BC
Page 94 of 132
Page 22 of 25
Initiative
About
Examples
Don’t Love It
To Death
- A campaign launched in 2022
by the Sea-to-Sky Destination
Management Council.
- Website features numerous
impacts and resources while
also encouraging community
members to do their part.
- Impact pages include facts and
reflective questions for readers.
- Source: Don't Love It To Death
Page 95 of 132
Page 23 of 25
Initiative
About
Examples
Take Action –
Urban Wildlife
(BC SPCA)
- The BC SPCA website has
many detailed educational
webpages and brochures that
provide information about urban
wildlife and how to prevent
human-wildlife conflict.
- Doesn’t just focus on bears;
also includes Wildlife Best
Practices for birds, raccoons,
squirrels, bears, deer, mice, and
rats.
- Their resources strive to
educate from the angle of
protecting the health and safety
of wildlife (rather than seeing
them solely as pests) through
cohabitation and personal
responsibility.
- Source: Coexisting with wildlife
- BC SPCA
Page 96 of 132
Page 24 of 25
Initiative
About
Examples
Bear Smart
Community
Program
(Province of
British
Columbia)
- “… designed by the Ministry of
Environment and Climate
Change Strategy in partnership
with the British Columbia
Conservation Foundation and
the Union of British Columbia
Municipalities.”
- This program is voluntary, and
its goal is to address the root
causes of human-bear conflicts.
- It encourages communities,
businesses, and individuals to
work together.
- Includes a series of criteria that
communities must achieve to be
recognized as “bear smart”.
- Sources: Bear Smart
Community Program - Province
of British Columbia, Be Bear
Smart Community Brochure
Page 97 of 132
Page 25 of 25
Initiative
About
Examples
Bear
Coexistence
Door Hangers
(The Fur-
Bearers)
- Free door hangers that can be
ordered on their website.
- Designed to provide education
on managing attractants, what
to do if you see a bear, and a
link to additional resources.
- Source: Bear Coexistence
Door Hangers - The Fur-Bearers
Page 98 of 132
MUNICIPAL OWNERS
WSPR STAFF REPORT
TO: West Shore Parks & Recreation Society Members
FROM: Grant Brown, Chief Administrative Officer
DATE: December 3, 2025
SUBJECT: Request for 2026 Owner Representative Appointment
RECOMMENDATION:
That the West Shore Parks & Recreation Society Members appoint one (1) elected official as its
representative to represent it at Society member meetings, including the annual general meeting for
2026.
BACKGROUND:
As per the West Shore Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agreement, which governs the
members’ obligations as participants in the West Shore Parks & Recreation Society, each
municipality shall appoint one of its elected officials as its representative for the purposes of this
Agreement and to represent it at Society member meetings, including annual general meetings and
those representatives may from time to time meet to discuss this Agreement, the Operating,
Maintenance and Management Agreement, the facilities and current issues and concerns that each
member may have.
DISCUSSION:
West Shore Parks & Recreation Society owner representatives are being sought for the upcoming
year. The 2026 annual general meeting will be held in June with a specific date to be determined, at
6:00pm at West Shore Parks & Recreation, 1767 Island Highway, Victoria, BC. Additional meetings,
as required from time to time, will be convened at the call of an owner representative.
BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
There is no budget impact resulting from this request.
Respectfully Submitted,
Grant Brown, Chief Administrative Officer
West Shore Parks & Recreation Society
Page 99 of 132
CITY OF LANGFORD
BYLAW NO. 2257
A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE A HOUSING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS the City has entered into a housing agreement under s. 483 of the Local Government Act,
registered against title as CB1426226 pursuant to s. 219 of the Land Title Act to the property legally
described as PID No. 005-488-800, Lot 1, Section 1, Esquimalt District, Plan 44446 (the “Lands”);
WHEREAS the Lands have been subdivided pursuant to strata plan EPS11763;
WHERESAS the City and the owner of the Lands have agreed to replace the prior housing agreement with
a new housing agreement over certain of the strata lots (the “Properties”); and
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the City of Langford, in open meeting assembled, enacts as a bylaw under
s.483 of the Local Government Act as follows:
1. Council hereby authorizes the City to discharge the housing agreement registered as CB1426226
against the Lands.
2. Council hereby authorizes the City to enter into a new housing agreement, attached as Appendix “A”,
with the owner of the Properties to be registered as a covenant against the Properties.
3. The Mayor and Corporate Officer of the City are authorized to execute the Form C – Release and Form
C – Housing Agreement, and the Corporate Officer is authorized to sign and file in the Land Title Office
a notice of the housing agreement, as required by the Local Government Act.
4. The appendix attached to this Bylaw is incorporated into and forms a part of this Bylaw.
5. City of Langford Housing Agreement (2772 Vantilburg Crescent) Bylaw No. 2185, 2024, is hereby
repealed.
6. The Bylaw may be cited as “City of Langford Housing Agreement (2772 Vantilburg Crescent), Bylaw
No. 2257, 2025”.
READ A FIRST TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A SECOND TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A THIRD TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
ADOPTED this day of, 2025.
PRESIDING COUNCIL MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
Page 100 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 2 of 12
Schedule A
TERMS OF INSTRUMENT - PART 2
HOUSING AGREEMENT AND SECTION 219 COVENANT
(Section 483 Local Government Act and 219 Land Title Act)
THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference the _____ day of _____________, 20___, is
BETWEEN:
1296341 B.C. LTD.
(Inc. No. BC1296341)
12738 Arran Pl.
Surrey, BC V3V 6J4
(the
"Owner")
AND:
CITY OF LANGFORD
2
nd
floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford,
B.C. V9B 2X8
(the
"City")
WHEREAS:
A. The Owner is the registered owner in fee simple of the lands and premises in the City of
Langford, British Columbia which are legally described in Item 2 of the Form C attached
hereto (the “Lands”);
B. Section 483 of the Local Government Act permits the City to enter into and note on title to
lands housing agreements which may include, without limitation, conditions in respect to
the form of tenure of housing units, availability of housing units to classes of persons,
administration of housing units, and rent that may be charged for housing units;
C. Section 219 of the Land Title Act permits the registration of a covenant of a positive or a
negative nature in favour of the City in respect of the use of, construction on, and
subdivision of land;
D. Council of the City has adopted a bylaw authorizing the City to enter into this Agreement
as a housing agreement under section 483 of the Local Government Act; and
Page 101 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 3 of 12
E. The City and the Owner wish to enter into this Agreement to provide long-term affordable
rental housing on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement.
In consideration of one dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and
sufficiency of which is acknowledged by both parties), and in consideration of the promises
exchanged below, the Owner and the City covenant and agree pursuant to section 483 of the
Local Government Act and section 219 of the Land Title Act as follows:
ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION
1.1 Definitions – In this Agreement, the following words have the following meanings:
(a) “Affordable Rent” means a rent payment amount equal to 10% below the “Private
Apartment Average Rents” for the corresponding bedroom type in the City of
Langford as established by CMHC’s Housing Market Information Portal for the year
the tenancy is entered into, or if that amount is not yet established for the year the
tenancy is entered into, then for the most recent year for which that amount has
been established;
(b) “Below-Market Rental Unit” has the meaning set out in clause 2.2;
(c) “CMHC” means Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation;
(d) “Eligible Tenant” means a tenant who, at the time they enter into a Tenancy
Agreement, has a gross household income equal to or less than the most recently
published Housing Income Limits;
(e) “Dwelling Unit” means a dwelling unit as defined in the City of Langford’s
“Langford Zoning Bylaw, 1999” as amended or replaced from time to time;
(f) “Housing Income Limits” means the Housing Income Limits for affordable
housing programs (for each category of dwelling unit) established by the British
Columbia Housing Management Commission, from time to time, for the “Victoria
Planning Area” as shown in the annual Housing Income Limits report published by
the British Columbia Housing Management Commission;
(g) “LTO” means the Victoria Land Title Office;
(h) “Site Plans” mean the site plan drafted by Victoria Design Group, project #8459
and dated Oct. 30, 2023, a copy of which is attached as Schedule A;
(i) “Subdivide” means to divide, apportion, consolidate or subdivide the Lands or any
building on the Lands, or the ownership or right to possession or occupation of the
Lands or any building on the Lands, into two or more lots, strata lots, parcels, parts,
portions or shares, whether by plan, descriptive words or otherwise, under the
Page 102 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 4 of 12
Land Title Act, the Strata Property Act, or otherwise, and includes the creation,
conversion, organization or development of “cooperative interests” or a “shared
interest in land” as defined in the Real Estate Development Marketing Act (British
Columbia);
(j) “Tenancy Agreement” means a tenancy agreement, lease, license or other
agreement granting rights to occupy a Below-Market Rental Unit;
(k) “Tenant” means an occupant of a Below-Market Rental Unit by way of a Tenancy
Agreement.
1.2 Interpretation – In this Agreement:
(a) reference to the singular includes a reference to the plural, and vice versa, unless
the context requires otherwise;
(b) article and section headings have been inserted for ease of reference only and are
not to be used in interpreting this Agreement;
(c) if a word or expression is defined in this Agreement, other parts of speech and
grammatical forms of the same word or expression have corresponding meanings;
(d) reference to any enactment includes any regulations, orders or directives made
under the authority of that enactment;
(e) reference to any enactment is a reference to that enactment as consolidated,
revised, amended, re-enacted or replaced, unless otherwise expressly provided;
(f) the provisions of section 25 of the Interpretation Act (British Columbia) with respect
to the calculation of time apply;
(g) time is of the essence;
(h) all provisions are to be interpreted as always speaking;
(i) reference to a “party” is a reference to a party to this Agreement and to that party’s
respective successors, assigns, trustees, administrators and receivers. Wherever
the context so requires, reference to a “party” also includes a Tenant, agent, officer
and invitee of the party;
(j) reference to a “day”, “month”, or “year” is a reference to a calendar day, calendar
month, or calendar year, as the case may be, unless otherwise expressly provided;
and
(k) where the word “including” is followed by a list, the contents of the list are not
Page 103 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 5 of 12
intended to circumscribe the generality of the expression preceding the word
“including”.
ARTICLE 2 USE AND CONSTRUCTION OF LANDS AND BELOW-MARKET RENTAL
UNITS
2.1 Use and Construction of Lands – The Owner covenants and agrees that the Lands will
not be used except in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and will not be developed and
no building or structure will be constructed or used on the Lands unless as part of the
development, construction, or use of any such building or structure, the Owner also designs and
constructs to completion, in accordance with a building permit issued by the City, any
development permit issued by the City and, if applicable, any rezoning consideration applicable
to the development on the Lands, no less than two (2) Dwelling Units to be used as Below-Market
Rental Units.
2.2 Rental Units – The Owner covenant and agrees that the Lands must not be used for any
purpose whatsoever unless the Dwelling Units labelled on the Site Plan as “Rental”, or such other
Dwelling Units as the parties may agree to in writing, (the “Below-Market Rental Units”) are used
or available for use as residential rental units and such use is pursuant to this Agreement.
2.3 Short-term Rentals Prohibited – The Owner agrees that no Below-Market Rental Unit
may be rented to or tenanted by any person for a term of less than thirty (30) days.
2.4 Requirement for Statutory Declaration – The City may, from time to time request the
Owner to provide written proof of compliance with this Agreement, and such Owner agrees to
provide, or cause an operator of the Lands to provide the City with such proof in a form reasonably
satisfactory to the City, including as a declaration made under oath.
2.5 City Authorized to Make Inquiries – The Owner hereby irrevocably authorizes the City
to make such inquiries as it considers necessary in order to confirm that the Owner is complying
with this Agreement.
2.6 Discharge of Housing Agreement – Subsequent to a construction of the Below-Market
Rental Units and subdivision of the Lands which creates individual lots for each Dwelling Unit, the
Owner may provide to the City a discharge of this Agreement from any portion of the Lands other
than the Below-Market Rental Units, which the City will execute and return to the Owner for filing
with the LTO.
2.7 Expiry of Housing Agreement – This Agreement will cease to apply from and after the
tenth (10
th
) anniversary of the date the City of Langford grants an occupancy permit for the Below-
Market Rental Units. Upon expiry, the Owner may provide to the City a discharge of this
Agreement, which the City will execute and return to the Owner for filing in the LTO.
Page 104 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 6 of 12
ARTICLE 3 USE OF BELOW-MARKET RENTAL UNITS
3.1 Occupancy and Tenure of Below-Market Rental Units – The Owner must not rent,
lease, license or otherwise permit occupancy of any Below-Market Rental Unit except in
accordance with the additional conditions:
(a) the Below-Market Rental Units must be used or occupied only for residential rental
purposes pursuant to a Tenancy Agreement;
(b) each Below-Market Rental Unit may only be tenanted to an Eligible Tenant, who:
(i) at the time of entering into the tenancy, resides in Langford; and
(ii) at the time of entering into the tenancy, does not own any land as defined
by the Interpretation Act (British Columbia).
(c) the Owner, and/or any immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, child by
blood, marriage, or adoption), will not reside in a Below-Market Rental Unit;
(d) the Owner will enter into a minimum 1-year Tenancy Agreement for each of the
Below-Market Rental Units which will convert to a month-to-month tenancy at the
end of the first-year term;
(e) the Owner will not require the Tenant or any permitted occupant to pay any extra
charges or fees for sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water or property or similar tax;
(f) the Owner will attach a copy of this Agreement, or at a minimum Articles 2 and 3
of this Agreement, to every Tenancy Agreement;
(g) the Owner will notify the City when a Tenancy Agreement terminates for any
reason and will notify the City when the Owner enters into a Tenancy Agreement;
and
(h) the Owner will forthwith deliver a true copy of any Tenancy Agreement to the City
upon demand.
Page 105 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 7 of 12
3.2 Tenant Screening and Records – The Owner covenants and agrees as follows:
(a) the Owner will review income of each prospective Tenant at the commencement
of each tenancy to determine whether the prospective Tenant is an Eligible Tenant;
(b) prior to entering to a Tenancy Agreement with a prospective Tenant, the Owner
must confirm that the prospective Tenant is an Eligible Tenant and that they meet
the requirements of clause 3.1(b); and
(c) the Owner must maintain a system of records indicating the incomes of each past
and current Tenant.
3.3 Rental Rates of Below-Market Rental Units – The Owner will not charge or set rental
rates for Below-Market Rental Units at the start of a tenancy that exceed Affordable Rent. The
Owner may increase rental rates during the term of a tenancy in accordance with the Residential
Tenancy Act.
ARTICLE 4 MISCELLANEOUS
4.1 Housing Agreement – The Owner acknowledges and agrees that:
(a) this Agreement includes a housing agreement entered into under section 483 of
the Local Government Act and covenants under section 219 of the Land Title Act;
(b) the City may file notice of, and register, this Agreement in the LTO pursuant to
section 483(5) of the Local Government Act against the title to the Lands.
4.2 Modification –This Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time, by written
consent of the Owner and a bylaw duly passed by the Council of the City and thereafter if it is
signed by the City and the Owner.
4.3 Management – The Owner covenants and agrees with the City that:
(a) the Owner will furnish good and efficient management of the Below-Market Rental
Units;
(b) the Owner will permit representatives of the City to inspect the Below-Market
Rental Units at any reasonable time, subject to the notice provisions of the
Residential Tenancy Act;
(c) the Owner will maintain the Below-Market Rental Units in a good state of repair
and fit for habitation in accordance with the requirements of the Residential
Tenancy Act, reasonable wear and tear excepted; and
(d) without restricting the foregoing, the Owner will comply with all applicable
Page 106 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 8 of 12
provisions of the Residential Tenancy Act and any other provincial or municipal
enactments imposing obligations on landlords in relation to residential tenancies.
4.4 Release and Indemnity – As an integral part of this Agreement, the Owner hereby
releases, indemnifies and saves harmless the City, its elected or appointed officials, officers,
employees or agents:
(a) from and against any and all liability, actions, causes of action, claims, suits,
proceedings, judgements, damages, expenses (including legal fees), demands,
and losses at any time suffered or incurred by, or brought against, the City, or any
of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees or agents, arising from or
in connection with the granting or existence of this Agreement, the performance of
any of the Owner’s obligations under this Agreement, the operation or existence
of a Tenancy Agreement or other lease made pursuant to this Agreement, the
issuance of any permit or approval by the City or any officers or employee of the
City, or any breach of any provision under this Agreement; and
(b) for all costs, fees and expenses, including legal fees, incurred by the City in the
enforcement of this Agreement as a result of any breach of any provision of this
Agreement by the covenantor.
4.5 Survival – The indemnity and release set out in this Agreement will survive termination or
discharge of this Agreement.
4.6 Costs – The Owner agrees to reimburse the City for all legal costs reasonably incurred
by the City for the preparation, execution and registration of this Agreement. The Owner will bear
their own costs, legal or otherwise, connected with the preparation, execution or registration of
this Agreement. The Owner further agrees that the Owner will perform its obligations under this
Agreement at its own expense and without compensation from the City.
4.7 City’s Powers Unaffected – This Agreement does not:
(a) affect, fetter or limit the discretion, rights, duties or powers of the City under any
enactment or at common law, including in relation to the use or subdivision of the
Lands;
(b) impose on the City any legal duty or obligation, including any duty of care or
contractual or other legal duty or obligation, to enforce this Agreement;
(c) affect or limit any enactment relating to the use or subdivision of the Lands; or
(d) relieve the Owner from complying with any enactment, including in relation to the
use or subdivision of the Lands.
Page 107 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 9 of 12
4.8 Agreement for Benefit of City Only – The Owner and the City agree that:
(a) this Agreement is entered into only for the benefit of the City;
(b) this Agreement is not intended to protect the interests of the Owner, any Tenant,
or any future Owner, lessee, occupier or user of the Lands or the building or any
portion thereof, including any Below-Market Rental Units; and
(c) the City may at any time execute a release and discharge of this Agreement,
without liability to anyone for doing so, and without obtaining the consent of the
Owner.
4.9 No Public Law Duty – Where the City is required or permitted by this Agreement to form
an opinion, exercise a discretion, express satisfaction, make a determination or give its consent,
the Owner agrees that the City is under no public law duty of fairness or natural justice in that
regard and agrees that the City may do any of those things in the same manner as if it were a
private party and not a public body.
4.10 Notice – Any notice required to be served or given to a party herein pursuant to this
Agreement will be sufficiently served or given if delivered,
(a) to the postal address of the Owner set out in the records at the LTO, and
(b) to the postal address of the City set out on the first page of the terms of this
Agreement and to the attention of the Director of Planning and Subdivision:
or to the most recent postal address provided in a written notice given by each of the parties to
the other. Any notice which is delivered is to be considered to have been given on the first day
after it is dispatched for delivery.
4.11 Enuring Effect – This Agreement will extend to and be binding upon and enure to the
benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
4.12 Severability – If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable,
such provision or any part thereof will be severed from this Agreement and the resultant remainder
of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
4.13 Waiver – All remedies of the City will be cumulative and may be exercised by the City in
any order or concurrently in case of any breach and each remedy may be exercised any number
of times with respect to each breach. Waiver of or delay in the City exercising any or all remedies
will not prevent the later exercise of any remedy for the same breach or any similar or different
breach.
4.14 Entire Agreement – This Agreement, and any documents signed by the Owner
contemplated by this Agreement, represent the entire agreement between the City and the Owner
Page 108 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 10 of 12
respecting the use and occupation of the Below-Market Rental Units, and there are no warranties,
representations, conditions or collateral agreements made by the City except as set forth in or
contemplated by this Agreement.
4.15 Further Assurances – Upon request by the City the Owner will forthwith do such acts
and execute such documents as may be reasonably necessary in the opinion of the City to give
effect to this Agreement.
4.16 Governing Law- This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with
the laws of the Province of British Columbia, which will be deemed to be the proper law hereof.
4.17 Priority – The Owner must cause this Agreement to be registered in the applicable land
title office against title to the Lands with priority over all financial liens, charges and
encumbrances, and any leases and options to purchase, registered or pending registration at the
time of application for registration of this Agreement, including by causing the holder of each such
lien, charge, encumbrance, lease or option to purchase to execute an instrument in a form
required by the City under which such holder postpones all of the holder’s rights to those of the
City under this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent as if such lien, charge,
encumbrance, lease or option to purchase had been registered immediately after the registration
of this Agreement.
4.18 Limitation on Owner’s Liability - The Owner is only liable for breaches of this Agreement
that occur while the Owner is the registered owner of the Lands.
4.19 Agreement Runs with Lands – This Agreement burdens and runs with the Lands and
every parcel into which it is Subdivided in perpetuity. All of the covenants and agreements
contained in this Agreement are made by the Owner for itself, its personal administrators,
successors and assigns, and all persons who after the date of this Agreement acquire an interest
in the Lands.
4.20 Equitable Remedies – The Owner acknowledges and agrees that damages would be an
inadequate remedy for the City for any breach of this Agreement and that the public interest
strongly favours specific performance, injunctive relief (mandatory or otherwise), or other
equitable relief, as the only adequate remedy for a default under this Agreement.
4.21 No Joint Venture – Nothing in this Agreement will constitute the Owner as the agent, joint
venturer, or partner of the City or give the Owner any authority to bind the City in any way.
4.22 Applicable Law – The laws of British Columbia (including, without limitation, the
Residential Tenancy Act) will apply to this Agreement and all statutes referred to herein are
enactments of the Province of British Columbia.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Land Title Act
Form C which is attached to and forms part of this Agreement.
Page 109 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 11 of 12
Schedule A Site Plan
Page 110 of 132
Bylaw No. 2257
Page 12 of 12
PRIORITY AGREEMENT
WHEREAS:
A. FIRST WEST CREDIT UNION INCORPORATION NO. FI-156 (the “Chargeholder”) is the holder
of a mortgage and assignment of rents (collectively, the “Financial Charge”) encumbering the
lands described in Item 2 of Part 1 of the Form C General Instrument to which this Priority
Agreement is attached and which is registered in the Victoria Land Title Office as CA9245017 and
CA9245018 respectively; and
B. A covenant pursuant to section 219 of the Land Title Act is being granted pursuant to Part 2 of the
Form C General Instrument to which this Priority Agreement is attached (the “City’s Charge”)
which is or will be registered against title to the lands.
NOW THEREFORE for one dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and agreed to by the Chargeholder, the Chargeholder hereby
grants to the City priority for the City’s Charges over all the Chargeholder’s right, title and interest in and
to the lands as if the City’s Charges had been executed, delivered and registered prior to the execution
and registration of the Financial Charge and prior to the advance of any monies pursuant to the Financial
Charge. The grant of priority is irrevocable, unqualified and without reservation or limitation.
END OF DOCUMENT
Page 111 of 132
t 250.478.7882
e administration@langford.ca
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford, BC V9B 2X8
Staff Report to Council
DATE: Monday, December 15, 2025
DEPARTMENT: Administration
SUBJECT: City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Adoption of Amendment
No. 1, Bylaw No. 2261, 2025
BACKGROUND:
At the Regular Council meeting of December 1, 2025, Council adopted Road Closure Bylaw 2258, 2025,
to close a portion of Hockley Avenue for a future cul-de-sac reconfiguration. At the same meeting,
Council also passed the following resolution to incorporate the closed road area into Woodlands Park:
That Council give 1st, 2nd, and 3rd reading to City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218,
2025, Amendment No. 1, Bylaw No. 2261, 2025.
COMMENTARY:
Council gave first, second, and third readings of Bylaw No. 2261, 2025 on December 1, 2025, to dedicate
the closed road area as part of Woodlands Park. There are no outstanding conditions or requirements at
this time. Council may wish to proceed with bylaw adoption.
OPTIONS:
Option 1
THAT Council adopt “City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Amendment No. 1, Bylaw
No. 2261, 2025".
OR Option 2
THAT Council not adopt “City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025, Amendment No. 1,
Bylaw No. 2261, 2025".
SUBMITTED BY: Sam Prette, Manager of Contracts and Agreements
Concurrence: Leah Stohmann, RPP, MCIP, Director of Community Planning and Development
Concurrence: Melisa Miles, Manager of Legislative Services
Page 112 of 132
Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2261, 2025– Adoption Report
20251215 - Council
Page 2 of 2
Concurrence: Donna Petrie, Senior Manager of Communications & Economic Development
Concurrence: Yari Nielsen, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities
Concurrence: Katelyn Balzer, P.Eng., Director of Engineering and Public Works
Concurrence: Michael Dillabaugh, CPA, CA, Director of Finance
Concurrence: Braden Hutchins, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Concurrence: Darren Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments: Bylaw No. 2261
Page 113 of 132
CITY OF LANGFORD
BYLAW NO. 2261, 2025
A BYLAW TO AMEND BYLAW NO. 2218, 2025
“CITY OF LANGFORD PARK DEDICATION BYLAW"
The Council of the City of Langford, in open meeting assembled, hereby enacts as follows:
A. City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025 is amended as follows:
1. By adding the following as section 7 to Schedule A:
7. That portion of closed road shown on Reference Plan EPP149463.
B. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “City of Langford Park Dedication Bylaw No. 2218, 2025,
Amendment No. 1, Bylaw No. 2261, 2025".
READ A FIRST TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A SECOND TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A THIRD TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025
ADOPTED this day of , 2025.
PRESIDING COUNCIL MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
Page 114 of 132
Bylaw No. 2264
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LANGFORD
BYLAW NO. 2264
A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE A HOUSING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS The Hockley Development Ltd. is the owner of the land legally described as: Lot 1, Section 5,
Esquimalt District, Plan EPP134408, PID: 032-164-122 (the “Property”);
WHEREAS the City has authorized Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 2264 under s. 483 of the Local Government
Act with respect to the Property; and
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the City of Langford, in open meeting assembled, enacts as a bylaw under
s.483 of the Local Government Act as follows:
1. Council hereby authorizes the City to enter into a housing agreement, attached as Appendix “A”, with
respect to the Property to be registered as a covenant against the Property.
2. The Mayor and Corporate Officer of the City are authorized to execute the Form C – Housing Agreement;
3. The Corporate Officer is authorized to sign and file in the Land Title Officer a notice of the housing
agreement, as required by the Local Government Act.
4. The appendix attached to this Bylaw is incorporated into and forms a part of this Bylaw.
5. The Bylaw may be cited as “City of Langford Housing Agreement (814 Hockley Avenue) Bylaw No. 2264,
2025”.
READ A FIRST TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A SECOND TIME this 1
st
day of December, 2025.
READ A THIRD TIME this 1
st
of December, 2025.
ADOPTED this day of, 2025.
PRESIDING COUNCIL MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
Page 115 of 132
2545710v2
TERMS OF INSTRUMENT - PART 2
HOUSING AGREEMENT AND SECTION 219 COVENANT
(Section 483 Local Government Act and 219 Land Title Act)
THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference the _____ day of _____________, 20___, is
BETWEEN:
THE HOCKLEY DEVELOPMENT LTD.
220-885 W. Georgia Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 3E8
(the "Owner")
AND:
CITY OF LANGFORD
2
nd
floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford, B.C. V9B 2X8
(the "City")
WHEREAS:
A. The Owner is the registered owner in fee simple of the lands and premises in the City of
Langford, British Columbia which are legally described in Item 2 of the Form C attached
hereto (the “Lands”);
B. Section 483 of the Local Government Act permits the City to enter into and note on title to
lands housing agreements which may include, without limitation, conditions in respect to
the form of tenure of housing units, availability of housing units to classes of persons,
administration of housing units, and rent that may be charged for housing units;
C. Section 219 of the Land Title Act permits the registration of a covenant of a positive or a
negative nature in favour of the City in respect of the use of, construction on, and
subdivision of land;
D. Council of the City has adopted a bylaw authorizing the City to enter into this Agreement
as a housing agreement under section 483 of the Local Government Act; and
E. The City and the Owner wish to enter into this Agreement to provide long-term affordable
rental housing on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement.
In consideration of one dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and
sufficiency of which is acknowledged by both parties), and in consideration of the promises
exchanged below, the Owner and the City covenant and agree pursuant to section 483 of the
Local Government Act and section 219 of the Land Title Act as follows:
Page 116 of 132
2545710v2
ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION
1.1 Definitions – In this Agreement, the following words have the following meanings:
(a) “Affordable Rent” means a rent payment amount equal to 10% below the “Private
Apartment Average Rents” for the corresponding bedroom type in the City of
Langford as established by CMHC’s Housing Market Information Portal for the year
the tenancy is entered into, or if that amount is not yet established for the year the
tenancy is entered into, then for the most recent year for which that amount has
been established;
(b) “Below-Market Rental Unit” has the meaning set out in clause 2.2;
(c) “CMHC” means Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation;
(d) “Eligible Tenant” means a tenant who, at the time they enter into a Tenancy
Agreement, has a gross household income equal to or less than the most recently
published Housing Income Limits;
(e) “Dwelling Unit” means a dwelling unit as defined in the City of Langford’s
“Langford Zoning Bylaw, 1999” as amended or replaced from time to time;
(f) “Housing Income Limits” means the Housing Income Limits for affordable
housing programs (for each category of dwelling unit) established by the British
Columbia Housing Management Commission, from time to time, for the “Victoria
Planning Area” as shown in the annual Housing Income Limits report published by
the British Columbia Housing Management Commission;
(g) “LTO” means the Victoria Land Title Office;
(h) “Site Plans” mean the site plan prepared by Kumar Architecture Ltd. and dated
October 2024, a copy of which is attached as Schedule A;
(i) “Subdivide” means to divide, apportion, consolidate or subdivide the Lands or any
building on the Lands, or the ownership or right to possession or occupation of the
Lands or any building on the Lands, into two or more lots, strata lots, parcels, parts,
portions or shares, whether by plan, descriptive words or otherwise, under the
Land Title Act, the Strata Property Act, or otherwise, and includes the creation,
conversion, organization or development of “cooperative interests” or a “shared
interest in land” as defined in the Real Estate Development Marketing Act (British
Columbia);
(j) “Tenancy Agreement” means a tenancy agreement, lease, license or other
agreement granting rights to occupy a Below-Market Rental Unit;
(k) “Tenant” means an occupant of a Below-Market Rental Unit by way of a Tenancy
Agreement.
Page 117 of 132
2545710v2
1.2 Interpretation – In this Agreement:
(a) reference to the singular includes a reference to the plural, and vice versa, unless
the context requires otherwise;
(b) article and section headings have been inserted for ease of reference only and are
not to be used in interpreting this Agreement;
(c) if a word or expression is defined in this Agreement, other parts of speech and
grammatical forms of the same word or expression have corresponding meanings;
(d) reference to any enactment includes any regulations, orders or directives made
under the authority of that enactment;
(e) reference to any enactment is a reference to that enactment as consolidated,
revised, amended, re-enacted or replaced, unless otherwise expressly provided;
(f) the provisions of section 25 of the Interpretation Act with respect to the calculation
of time apply;
(g) time is of the essence;
(h) all provisions are to be interpreted as always speaking;
(i) reference to a “party” is a reference to a party to this Agreement and to that party’s
respective successors, assigns, trustees, administrators and receivers. Wherever
the context so requires, reference to a “party” also includes a Tenant, agent, officer
and invitee of the party;
(j) reference to a “day”, “month”, or “year” is a reference to a calendar day, calendar
month, or calendar year, as the case may be, unless otherwise expressly provided;
and
(k) where the word “including” is followed by a list, the contents of the list are not
intended to circumscribe the generality of the expression preceding the word
“including”.
ARTICLE 2 USE AND CONSTRUCTION OF LANDS AND BELOW-MARKET RENTAL
UNITS
2.1 Use and Construction of Lands – The Owner covenants and agrees that the Lands will
not be used except in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and will not be developed and
no building or structure will be constructed or used on the Lands unless as part of the
development, construction, or use of any such building or structure, the Owner also designs and
constructs to completion, in accordance with a building permit issued by the City, any
development permit issued by the City and, if applicable, any rezoning consideration applicable
to the development on the Lands, no less than eight (8) Dwelling Units, representing 10% of the
total Dwelling Units to be constructed, to be used as Below-Market Rental Units.
Page 118 of 132
2545710v2
2.2 Rental Units – The Owner covenant and agrees that the Lands must not be used for any
purpose whatsoever unless the Dwelling Units labelled on the Site Plan as “Attainable Units”, or
such other Dwelling Units as the parties may agree to in writing, (the “Below-Market Rental
Units”) are used or available for use as residential rental units and such use is pursuant to this
Agreement.
2.3 Short-term Rentals Prohibited – The Owner agrees that no Below-Market Rental Unit
may be rented to or tenanted by any person for a term of less than thirty (30) days.
2.4 Requirement for Statutory Declaration – The City may, from time to time request the
Owner to provide written proof of compliance with this Agreement, and such Owner agrees to
provide, or cause an operator of the Lands to provide the City with such proof in a form reasonably
satisfactory to the City, including as a declaration made under oath.
2.5 City Authorized to Make Inquiries – The Owner hereby irrevocably authorizes the City
to make such inquiries as it considers necessary in order to confirm that the Owner is complying
with this Agreement.
2.6 Discharge of Housing Agreement – Subsequent to a construction of the Below-Market
Rental Units and subdivision of the Lands which creates individual lots for each Dwelling Unit, the
Owner may provide to the City a discharge of this Agreement from any portion of the Lands other
than the Below-Market Rental Units, which the City will execute and return to the Owner for filing
with the LTO.
2.7 Expiry of Housing Agreement – This Agreement will cease to apply from and after the
25
th
anniversary of the date the City of Langford grants an occupancy permit for the Below-Market
Rental Units. Upon expiry, the Owner may provide to the City a discharge of this Agreement,
which the City will execute and return to the Owner for filing in the LTO.
ARTICLE 3 USE OF BELOW-MARKET RENTAL UNITS
3.1 Occupancy and Tenure of Below-Market Rental Units – The Owner must not rent,
lease, license or otherwise permit occupancy of any Below-Market Rental Unit except in
accordance with the additional conditions:
(a) the Below-Market Rental Units must be used or occupied only for residential rental
purposes pursuant to a Tenancy Agreement;
(b) each Below-Market Rental Unit may only be tenanted to an Eligible Tenant, who:
(i) at the time of entering into the tenancy, resides in Langford; and
(ii) at the time of entering into the tenancy, does not own any land as defined
by the Interpretation Act.
(c) the Owner, and/or any immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, child by
blood, marriage, or adoption), will not reside in a Below-Market Rental Unit;
(d) the Owner will enter into a minimum 1-year Tenancy Agreement for each of the
Page 119 of 132
2545710v2
Below-Market Rental Units which will convert to a month-to-month tenancy at the
end of the first-year term;
(e) the Owner will not require the Tenant or any permitted occupant to pay any extra
charges or fees for sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water or property or similar tax;
(f) the Owner will attach a copy of this Agreement, or at a minimum Articles 2 and 3
of this Agreement, to every Tenancy Agreement;
(g) the Owner will notify the City when a Tenancy Agreement terminates for any
reason and will notify the City when the Owner enters into a Tenancy Agreement;
and
(h) the Owner will forthwith deliver a true copy of any Tenancy Agreement to the City
upon demand.
3.2 Tenant Screening and Records – The Owner covenants and agrees as follows:
(a) the Owner will review income of each prospective Tenant at the commencement
of each tenancy to determine whether the prospective Tenant is an Eligible Tenant;
(b) prior to entering to a Tenancy Agreement with a prospective Tenant, the Owner
must confirm that the prospective Tenant is an Eligible Tenant and that they meet
the requirements of clause 3.1(b); and
(c) the Owner must maintain a system of records indicating the incomes of each past
and current Tenant.
3.3 Rental Rates of Below-Market Rental Units – The Owner will not charge or set rental
rates for Below-Market Rental Units at the start of a tenancy that exceed Affordable Rent. The
Owner may increase rental rates during the term of a tenancy in accordance with the Residential
Tenancy Act.
ARTICLE 4 MISCELLANEOUS
4.1 Housing Agreement – The Owner acknowledges and agrees that:
(a) this Agreement includes a housing agreement entered into under section 483 of
the Local Government Act and covenants under section 219 of the Land Title Act;
(b) the City may file notice of, and register, this Agreement in the LTO pursuant to
section 483(5) of the Local Government Act against the title to the Lands.
4.2 Modification –This Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time, by written
consent of the Owner and a bylaw duly passed by the Council of the City and thereafter if it is
signed by the City and the Owner.
4.3 Management – The Owner covenants and agrees with the City that:
Page 120 of 132
2545710v2
(a) the Owner will furnish good and efficient management of the Below-Market Rental
Units;
(b) the Owner will permit representatives of the City to inspect the Below-Market
Rental Units at any reasonable time, subject to the notice provisions of the
Residential Tenancy Act;
(c) the Owner will maintain the Below-Market Rental Units in a good state of repair
and fit for habitation in accordance with the requirements of the Residential
Tenancy Act, reasonable wear and tear excepted; and
(d) without restricting the foregoing, the Owner will comply with all applicable
provisions of the Residential Tenancy Act and any other provincial or municipal
enactments imposing obligations on landlords in relation to residential tenancies.
4.4 Release and Indemnity – As an integral part of this Agreement, the Owner hereby
releases, indemnifies and saves harmless the City, its elected or appointed officials, officers,
employees or agents:
(a) from and against any and all liability, actions, causes of action, claims, suits,
proceedings, judgements, damages, expenses (including legal fees), demands,
and losses at any time suffered or incurred by, or brought against, the City, or any
of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees or agents, arising from or
in connection with the granting or existence of this Agreement, the performance of
any of the Owner’s obligations under this Agreement, the operation or existence
of a Tenancy Agreement or other lease made pursuant to this Agreement, the
issuance of any permit or approval by the City or any officers or employee of the
City, or any breach of any provision under this Agreement; and
(b) for all costs, fees and expenses, including legal fees, incurred by the City in the
enforcement of this Agreement as a result of any breach of any provision of this
Agreement by the covenantor.
4.5 Survival – The indemnity and release set out in this Agreement will survive termination or
discharge of this Agreement.
4.6 Costs – The Owner agrees to reimburse the City for all legal costs reasonably incurred
by the City for the preparation, execution and registration of this Agreement. The Owner will bear
their own costs, legal or otherwise, connected with the preparation, execution or registration of
this Agreement. The Owner further agrees that the Owner will perform its obligations under this
Agreement at its own expense and without compensation from the City.
4.7 City’s Powers Unaffected – This Agreement does not:
(a) affect, fetter or limit the discretion, rights, duties or powers of the City under any
enactment or at common law, including in relation to the use or subdivision of the
Lands;
(b) impose on the City any legal duty or obligation, including any duty of care or
contractual or other legal duty or obligation, to enforce this Agreement;
Page 121 of 132
2545710v2
(c) affect or limit any enactment relating to the use or subdivision of the Lands; or
(d) relieve the Owner from complying with any enactment, including in relation to the
use or subdivision of the Lands.
4.8 Agreement for Benefit of City Only – The Owner and the City agree that:
(a) this Agreement is entered into only for the benefit of the City;
(b) this Agreement is not intended to protect the interests of the Owner, any Tenant,
or any future Owner, lessee, occupier or user of the Lands or the building or any
portion thereof, including any Below-Market Rental Units; and
(c) the City may at any time execute a release and discharge of this Agreement,
without liability to anyone for doing so, and without obtaining the consent of the
Owner.
4.9 No Public Law Duty – Where the City is required or permitted by this Agreement to form
an opinion, exercise a discretion, express satisfaction, make a determination or give its consent,
the Owner agrees that the City is under no public law duty of fairness or natural justice in that
regard and agrees that the City may do any of those things in the same manner as if it were a
private party and not a public body.
4.10 Notice – Any notice required to be served or given to a party herein pursuant to this
Agreement will be sufficiently served or given if delivered,
(a) to the postal address of the Owner set out in the records at the LTO, and
(b) to the postal address of the City set out on the first page of the terms of this
Agreement and to the attention of the Director of Planning and Subdivision:
or to the most recent postal address provided in a written notice given by each of the parties to
the other. Any notice which is delivered is to be considered to have been given on the first day
after it is dispatched for delivery.
4.11 Enuring Effect – This Agreement will extend to and be binding upon and enure to the
benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
4.12 Severability – If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable,
such provision or any part thereof will be severed from this Agreement and the resultant remainder
of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
4.13 Waiver – All remedies of the City will be cumulative and may be exercised by the City in
any order or concurrently in case of any breach and each remedy may be exercised any number
of times with respect to each breach. Waiver of or delay in the City exercising any or all remedies
will not prevent the later exercise of any remedy for the same breach or any similar or different
breach.
4.14 Entire Agreement – This Agreement, and any documents signed by the Owner
Page 122 of 132
2545710v2
contemplated by this Agreement, represent the entire agreement between the City and the Owner
respecting the use and occupation of the Below-Market Rental Units, and there are no warranties,
representations, conditions or collateral agreements made by the City except as set forth in or
contemplated by this Agreement.
4.15 Further Assurances – Upon request by the City the Owner will forthwith do such acts
and execute such documents as may be reasonably necessary in the opinion of the City to give
effect to this Agreement.
4.16 Governing Law- This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with
the laws of the Province of British Columbia, which will be deemed to be the proper law hereof.
4.17 Priority – The Owner must cause this Agreement to be registered in the applicable land
title office against title to the Lands with priority over all financial liens, charges and
encumbrances, and any leases and options to purchase, registered or pending registration at the
time of application for registration of this Agreement, including by causing the holder of each such
lien, charge, encumbrance, lease or option to purchase to execute an instrument in a form
required by the City under which such holder postpones all of the holder’s rights to those of the
City under this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent as if such lien, charge,
encumbrance, lease or option to purchase had been registered immediately after the registration
of this Agreement.
4.18 Limitation on Owner’s Liability - The Owner is only liable for breaches of this Agreement
that occur while the Owner is the registered owner of the Lands.
4.19 Agreement Runs with Lands – This Agreement burdens and runs with the Lands and
every parcel into which it is Subdivided in perpetuity. All of the covenants and agreements
contained in this Agreement are made by the Owner for itself, its personal administrators,
successors and assigns, and all persons who after the date of this Agreement acquire an interest
in the Lands.
4.20 Equitable Remedies – The Owner acknowledges and agrees that damages would be an
inadequate remedy for the City for any breach of this Agreement and that the public interest
strongly favours specific performance, injunctive relief (mandatory or otherwise), or other
equitable relief, as the only adequate remedy for a default under this Agreement.
4.21 No Joint Venture – Nothing in this Agreement will constitute the Owner as the agent, joint
venturer, or partner of the City or give the Owner any authority to bind the City in any way.
4.22 Applicable Law – The laws of British Columbia (including, without limitation, the
Residential Tenancy Act) will apply to this Agreement and all statutes referred to herein are
enactments of the Province of British Columbia.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Land Title Act
Form C which is attached to and forms part of this Agreement.
Page 123 of 132
2545710v2
Schedule A – Site Plan
[see attached]
Page 124 of 132
'1
83
+
$
352326('81,708/7,)$0,/<%8,/',1*
%8,/',1*)22735,17 64064)7
0$,1)/225(/(9 
*(2'(7,&(/(9 P

3$7,2 3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,23$7,2
3$7,23$7,23$7,2
3$7,23$7,2
/2$',1*
287'225$0(1,7</$1'6&$3(
$5($5()(572/$1'6&$3(3/$16
64064)7
307
0$,1
(175$1&(
3,&.(75$,/,1*
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(
81'(5*5281'
3$5.,1*
(175<
+2&./(<$9(18(

/27$
(33
5$03
675$7$3/$1
9,6

/27
(33

0:,'(:$/.:$<
0:,'(:$/.:$<
0:,'(:$/.:$<
0:,'(
:$/.:$<
0:,'(:$/.:$<
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
0:,'(:$/.:$<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<



5$03'13$5.$'(
6/23('1 6/23('1

P

P

P

P
72:

P
72:
),5(
+<'5$17

       

6(7%$&.


6(7%$&.


6(7%$&.

%,.(
5$&.
3/$17(5
         
  
  


P6,'(:$/.







%28/(9$5'
$
$


$











$
$
$
)
)
)
352326('
3523(57<
6,7($5($
+2&./(<$9(18(
+2&./(<$9(18(
3($775'









6,7(3/$1127(6
5()(572&,9,/(1*,1((5,1*'5$:,1*6)25*5$',1*'5$,1$*(
6,7(6(59,&,1*,1)250$7,21
5()(572(/(&75,&$/'5$:,1*6)256,7(/,*+7,1*32:(5
,1)250$7,21127($//(/(&75,&$//,*+7,1*(48,30(176+2:1
,1'$6+('/,1(,1',&$7,1*,7,6$%29(685)$&(
5()(572/$1'6&$3('5$:,1*6)25'(7$,/('/$1'6&$3,1*
/$<2873/$17,1*,1)250$7,21$1'685)$&(),1,6+(6
5()(572'5$:,1*$)256,7('(7$,/6
6,'(:$/.6&85%6$5(&$67&21&5(7(7<3,&$/P$%29(
$'-$&(179(+,&8/$575$)),&685)$&(
326702817('6,*1$*(72%(,16(70,1P)520)$&(2)
&85%7<3,&$/
6,'(:$/.6$5(P:,'(7<3,&$/:,7+%5220),1,6+81/(66
27+(5:,6(127('
0(&+$1,&$/$,5:(//6&::$/.$%/(*$/9$1,=('67((/*5$7(6
21*$/9$1,=('$1*/(6$1&+25(',172&21&5(7(6(&85(
*5$7(6$*$,16781$87+25,=('5(029$/5()(572
6758&785$/0(&+$1,&$/'5$:,1*6(/(&75,&$/9$8/7
*5$7,1*72(10$;63(&,),&$7,216
180%(52)67$,55,6(5672%(&21),50('216,7($*$,167
),1$/),1,6+('*5$'(6
6,7(67$7,67,&
6,7('$7$
$''5(66 +2&./(<$9(/$1*)25'%&
/(*$/'(6&5,37,21 /27%3/$19,6)2/,2
=21,1* 5(;,67,1* &&352326('
%8,/',1*$5($ 64)7P
6,7(3/$1/(*(1'
3523(57</,1(
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
$VLQGLFDWHG
$0
$
6,7(3/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
6,7(3/$1
6&$/( 
$
$(5,$/9,(:
127(
%8,/'(52:1(5,6/,$%/()25$1<&2676,1&855('
'8(72$1(5525,17+($%29(3/$1,)
&216758&7,2167$57635,25727+,63/$1%(,1*
$33529('%<7+(/2&$/$33529,1*$87+25,7<
%8,/'(52:1(5729(5,)<%8,/',1*',0(16,216
35,257267$.(287
%8,/'(52:1(55(63216,%/(72(1685(%$&.),//
/(9(/60((7$//&2'(6
127(
)25*5$',1*5()(572&,9,/'5$:,1*6
)25/$1'6&$3(5()(572/$1'6&$3('5$:,1*6
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 ,668(')25)281'$7,213(50,7
Page 125 of 132
'1
)
)
':
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
'1
)
':
)
':
83
)
':
)
':
'1
)
':
)
':
)
':
)
':
+
)
'
&
%
$
$
$
$
$
%('$

%('

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

%('%

%(''(1%

%(''(1%

%('&

*$5%$*(
5(&<&/,1*

67$,5
67
67$,5
67
(;,7
&255,'25

   


3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,2
3$7,23$7,2
3$7,2
81,7
(175<
287'225$0(1,7<
$5($5()(572
/$1'6&$3(
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
5$03'13$5.$'(
81,7
(175<
(175$1&(
3523(57</,1(
3/$17(5
3/$17(5
3/$17(5 3/$17(5
3/$17(53/$17(5
3/$17(5
3/$17(5
/2$',1*
([LW
([LW
([LW
([LW
3523(57</,1(
307
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<
81,7
(175<


3/$17(5


3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(

'67%
'67$
'$
'%
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'%
81,7
(175<
:
:D
:
:
0:,'(
:$/.:$<
:$/.:$<
%,.(5$&.
3/$17(5

5$03
(/(9$725

&$1$'$3267
3$5&(/
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

0:,'(
:$/.:$<
0:,'(
:$/.:$<
:$/.:$<
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(
/,1(2)81'(5*5281'6758&785(

(
*
6/23('1 6/23('1
(/(&

$1181&,$725
3$1(/
'$
),5(
'(3$570(17
&211(&7,21
 
*8$5'5$,/
6+$)7
   

   

P
72:

P

P

P
: :
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
6+$)7
&255,'25

3
(;+$867
3
(;+$867

P




P

'
'$
'$
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/

$
$
'%
:
$
$
'67%

  



         



P

$
$
'&
'%
'&
'%
*/
*/
:
'$
'$
'%
*/
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
*/
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
   

$
6LP
$
$
$

6/23(
',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(83
7+58522)
   

     








                 
:
:
:
   
 
 
   

    
:
:
:
:
: :
5$,/,1*
 

5#

5#
3/$17(5
'1
9(67,%8/(
$
)
0$,/

'

'&
/2%%<
%

DFWLYH DFWLYH
3%
3%
/,1(2)6(&21'
)/225$%29(

/,1(2)6(&21'
)/225$%29(
:
/,1(2)%$/&21<$%29(
/,1(2)%$/&21<$%29(
/,1(2)%$/&21<$%29(
*/
*8$5'5$,/
)
)

:
:D

'67$
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
)
:
:D
:
:
:
:

P

P


  
:
$
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
$
% & ' (
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,6
7+(3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('72
7+(0125(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+287
7+(3(50,66,212).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1'
:+(1,7,60$'(0867%($5,761$0(7+,6
'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(&2175$&725
,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$127('
+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<
72.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
2&7
81 81
+2&./(<$9(18(
/$1*)25'%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
127(
)257+(81,7',0(16,216$1'3$57,7,21
5()(572(1/$5*('3/$16
$77$,1$%/(81,7
5HY \\PPGG 5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQE\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 126 of 132
)
'
&
%
$
$
%('

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

%('%

%('&

%(''(1%

%(''(1%

%(''(1&

%(''

%('(

%(''(1$

(/(&

67$,5
67

'67
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
35,9$&<
6&5((1
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<%$/&21<%$/&21<





%('$

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

(
*
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
        



    

6+$)7

'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/
'%
'
*/
*/
*/
*/


6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
:
:
:
:
:
:
$
:
$
:
:
:
:
$
$
&255,'25

*/
*/
'%
'$
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'%
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'%
*/
*/
'&
'&
*/
*/
*/
*/
*/
67$,5
67
*/
:
*/
*/
:


(/(9$725



35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
'%

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1


6LP
$
',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(
837+58
522)









',67$1&(723/

',67$1&(723/

 

  



                   


   

     







 
                  







    
:
:
)$&$'(
)($785(
$77$,1$%/(81,7
$77$,1$%/(81,7
$77$,1$%/(81,7
)
)
*/
*/
&255,'25

$
$
$
:
'67


*/
$
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 127 of 132
)
'
&
%
$
$
$
$
%('$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

%('&

%(''(1%

%(''(1%

%(''(1&

%(''

"
"
(/(&

67$,5
67



(
*
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21< %$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<%$/&21<
%$/&21<
$
$
        


    

%('

%('%

(/(9$725

6+$)7







6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1
35,9$&<
6&5((1

35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
*/
*/
'%
'&
'&
*/
*/
'%
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
'67
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
:
:
:
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
:
'%
*/ */
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
*/
:
:
:
*/
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
*/
'$
'$
'$
'
'$
'$
'67
:
%$/&21<

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1




',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(
837+58
522)
:
:
:
:
   

              

    









 

  

                

  
     

    


 

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
)$&$'(
)($785(
*/
:
$77$,1$%/(81,7
)
)
67$,5
67
:
$
$
$
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 128 of 132
)
'
&
%
$
$
$
$
%('$

%('$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

67$,5
67
%('&

%(''(1%

%(1'(1%

%(''(1&

67$,5
67
"
"
(/(9




(
*
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21< %$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<%$/&21<
        

    
$
$










6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1
35,9$&<
6&5((1

35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
%(''

%('%

*/
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
:
:
*/
*/
'%
*/
:
*/
*/
'%
'&
'&
*/
*/
*/
'%
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
:
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
:
*/
:
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
:
:
'&
'%
'&
'%
:
:
:
:
:
:
*/
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'67
'
(/(&

6+$)7

'67
&255,'25

%$/&21<

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1


',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(
837+58
522)
   

               





  













     

                    
           

:
::
:





:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
)$&$'(
)($785(
)
*/
$77$,1$%/(81,7
)
)
$
$
$
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 129 of 132
)
'
&
%
$
$
$
$
%('$

%('$

%(''(1$

%(1'(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

%('(

%(''

%(''(1%

%(''(1%

%('&

(/(9
67$,5
67
67$,5
67



(
*
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21< %$/&21<%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<%$/&21<
%$/&21<
$
$
        

    







6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
'%
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
*/
:
:
*/
'%
*/
:
*/
:
:
*/
:
*/
*/
:
*/
'%
*/
*/
:
*/
*/
'%
*/
:
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
:
*/*/
*/
:
'%
*/
*/
*/
:
*/
'%
'&
*/
:
'&
*/
*/
:
:
:
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
'$
%('%

%(''(1&

'67
'67
35,9$&<
6&5((1
%$/&21<
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
(/(&

6+$)7


6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1


',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(
837+58
522)
:
:
:
:
                    

   







  

  

                  











'
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
)$&$'(
)($785(
*/
)
$77$,1$%/(81,7

)
)
$
$
$
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 130 of 132
)
'
&
%
$
$
$
$
%('$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

%(''(1$

678',2%

%('&

%('(

67$,5
67
67$,5
67
%(''(1%

%(''(1%

%(''(1&

%(''



(
*
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21< %$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<
%$/&21<%$/&21<
%$/&21<
$
$
        

    


6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
%$/&21<
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
35,9$&<
6&5((1
'$
*/ */
*/
'%
*/
*/
'$
'$
*/
*/


*/
'&
*/
*/
'%
*/
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
*/
'%
*/
*/
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
'&
'%
:
:
:
:
%('$

(/(&

6+$)7

&255,'25

(/(9

'$
'$
'$
'$
'
'$
'$
'$
'67
'67
'$
%('%

'$
'$

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1

6/23(
'1




',$
&20%867,21
$,5
',$
(;+$867$,5
[),5(
5$7('&+$6(
837+58
522)
                  

 

   







    

                   











)
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
*/
$77$,1$%/(81,7
)
)
$
$
:
:
:
:
:
6FDOH
3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH
'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\
&2168/7$17
3(50,767$03
6($/
7+,6'5$:,1*$6$1,167580(172)6(59,&(,67+(
3523(57<2).80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7'7+(
&23<5,*+7,17+(6$0(%(,1*5(6(59('727+(012
5(352'8&7,21,6$//2:(':,7+2877+(3(50,66,21
2).80$5$5&+,7(&785($1':+(1,7,60$'(0867
%($5,761$0(7+,6'5$:,1*,612772%(6&$/('7+(
&2175$&725,6729(5,)<7+(',0(16,216$1''$7$
127('+(5(,1:,7+7+(&21',7,216216,7($1',6
5(63216,%/()255(3257,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<72
.80$5$5&+,7(&785(/7')25$'-8670(17
352-(&7
'5$:,1*
7,7/(
5(9,6,21
 
30
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
%&
+2&./(<5(6,'(17,$/
2&7
6' &+(&.(5
+2&./(<$9(18(/$1*)25'%&
6&$/( 
$
/(9(/)/2253/$1
5HY \\PPG
G
5HYLVLRQ'UDZLQJ,VVXH 'UDZQ
E\
 ,668(')25%3
 5(,668(')25%3 (6
 5(,668(')25ES (6
Page 131 of 132
2545710v2
PRIORITY AGREEMENT
WHEREAS:
A. BANCORP GROWTH MORTGAGE FUND II LTD., BANCORP FINANCIAL SERVICES INC. and
BANCORP BALANCED MORTGAGE FUND II LTD. (collectively, the “Chargeholder”) is the
holder of a mortgage and assignment of rents (collectively, the “Financial Charge”) encumbering
the lands described in Item 2 of Part 1 of the Form C General Instrument to which this Priority
Agreement is attached and which is registered in the Victoria Land Title Office as CB895508 and
CB895509 respectively; and
B. A covenant pursuant to section 219 of the Land Title Act is being granted pursuant to Part 2 of the
Form C General Instrument to which this Priority Agreement is attached (the “City’s Charge”)
which is or will be registered against title to the lands.
NOW THEREFORE for one dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
suf ficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and agreed to by the Chargeholder, the Chargeholder hereby
grants to the City priority for the City’s Charges over all the Chargeholder’s right, title and interest in and
to the lands as if the City’s Charges had been executed, delivered and registered prior to the execution
and registration of the Financial Charge and prior to the advance of any monies pursuant to the Financial
Charge. The grant of priority is irrevocable, unqualified and without reservation or limitation.
END OF DOCUMENT
Page 132 of 132