Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, May 10, 2021

[0:00:01] Voice 10: Yes, I see the attendees are starting to come in.

[0:00:15] Voice 10: Welcome, everybody.

[0:00:16] Voice 10: We'll start in just a moment while attendees arrive.

[0:00:46] Voice 10: Thank you, Michael.

[0:00:56] Voice 10: Okay.

[0:00:59] Voice 10: Sorry, I'm just going to close my door.

[0:01:02] Voice 10: Sorry about that.

[0:01:07] Voice 17: Welcome to the regular meeting of the Maine Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:01:14] Voice 17: Happy to be here.

[0:01:15] Voice 17: My name is Dan Rogers and I'm the chair of the local trust committee and a member of the executive

[0:01:22] Voice 17: committee. I want to start by acknowledging that we're very pleased to be meeting across the

[0:01:31] Voice 17: Coast Salish territories of the traditional territory of the Coast Salish peoples.

[0:01:37] Voice 17: The Coast Salish peoples have lived in this area for a millennium and we are very pleased to be

[0:01:44] Voice 17: able to meet and live and work and play in this area. It's a lovely day across the Salish Sea. I

[0:01:50] Voice 17: happen to be joining you from the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and

[0:01:56] Voice 17: Tsleil-Waututh people across the Salish Sea. And I know most of you are on Main Island,

[0:02:03] Voice 17: which is the traditional territories of the Tsar Philippine and WSAMIC peoples, and

[0:02:09] Voice 17: we're very pleased to be able to do that. We'd like to recognize that as we continue our work

[0:02:14] Voice 17: under the Reconciliation Principles and Declaration of the Islands Trust.

[0:02:20] Voice 17: So welcome for those of you on Main Island.

[0:02:23] Voice 17: And I know we have people and staff joining us from other areas in the Coast Salish territories,

[0:02:30] Voice 17: from Victoria and, of course, on Main Island.

[0:02:35] Voice 17: So, as I said, my name is Dan Rogers. I'll tell you a bit about me in a moment.

[0:02:39] Voice 17: we have 19 attendees today in addition to the eight people you see on your screen

[0:02:45] Voice 17: I'd like to introduce some of the folks you see on your screen some of whom you'll be hearing

[0:02:51] Voice 17: from during the course of the day and some of whom are facilitating this meeting first of all

[0:02:56] Voice 17: of course your main island local trustees trustee Janine Dodds and trustee David Maude nice to see

[0:03:03] Voice 17: you both again someday i haven't seen you but either you in person since march of 2020 but

[0:03:09] Voice 17: i see you occasionally in a little box in front of me and it's nice to see you both

[0:03:15] Voice 17: um i wish i was on main island today for this meeting i was thinking back that i was there

[0:03:21] Voice 17: in in august or september of last year briefly i came on the island when those restrictions

[0:03:27] Voice 17: restrictions were lifted and haven't been able to get back since.

[0:03:31] Voice 17: Also joining us today are Islands Trust staff.

[0:03:35] Voice 17: You'll see Robert Kojima, who is the regional planning manager.

[0:03:40] Voice 17: And then you have the island planner, Narissa Chadwick,

[0:03:47] Voice 17: you'll be hearing from as we work through some of the issues.

[0:03:50] Voice 17: And planner Phil Testamale, who has a couple of the applications

[0:03:55] Voice 17: that are on the file and presenting,

[0:03:57] Voice 17: and they'll be presenting to you

[0:03:59] Voice 17: as we get to the issues on the agenda.

[0:04:01] Voice 17: In addition, you'll see on your screen at the present time,

[0:04:04] Voice 17: you'll see the planning assistant, Maple Hung,

[0:04:06] Voice 17: who is basically running the electronics behind us.

[0:04:10] Voice 17: You'll hear me talk to Maple from time to time

[0:04:12] Voice 17: during the course of the day.

[0:04:14] Voice 17: Thank you, Maple, for all the work that you're doing.

[0:04:16] Voice 17: And you see the recorder, Pat Todd,

[0:04:18] Voice 17: who's familiar to many of you on Main Island, of course.

[0:04:22] Voice 17: And Pat will be taking the minutes,

[0:04:24] Voice 17: And you may hear me talk to Pat from time to time, just as we work through the agenda.

[0:04:30] Voice 17: So this is the continuation of our electronic meeting process.

[0:04:37] Voice 17: We are continuing, of course, to honor the public health declarations and orders from

[0:04:41] Voice 17: the government.

[0:04:43] Voice 17: We're continuing to operate in a virtual world until such time as we can gather in person

[0:04:49] Voice 17: and together and which who knows when that's going to be the pandemic is taking its own course and

[0:04:58] Voice 17: as we try to manage it we will continue to do this we've been doing this for over a year now

[0:05:04] Voice 17: and we have most of the processes put in place related to how to run these meetings but from

[0:05:13] Voice 17: time to time we will we do continue to have electronic issues please bear with us if we

[0:05:19] Voice 17: We have those, and we are trying to do this so that we can continue to hear from the public

[0:05:25] Voice 17: so that you can observe the proceedings and so that we can continue to engage with our

[0:05:32] Voice 17: work as we go forward.

[0:05:34] Voice 17: Please let us know if you're having any electrical technical problems, and we'll try and resolve

[0:05:39] Voice 17: that as we go through.

[0:05:40] Voice 17: So this meeting is being broadcast live.

[0:05:46] Voice 17: in addition many of you have joined us on the zoom webinar you are in what's called the

[0:05:54] Voice 17: attendee section of the webinar as i said it's being broadcast and is being recorded

[0:05:58] Voice 17: and the full meeting will be available on our website usually within two or three days

[0:06:05] Voice 17: and you can review it and go back and see it anytime you wish

[0:06:11] Voice 17: the process that we utilize is that during the course of the meeting most of the meeting is

[0:06:17] Voice 17: is our business meeting and in the sense that we are talking to each other and to the staff

[0:06:22] Voice 17: and getting reports etc and while you are in an attendees situation you you are not able to speak

[0:06:31] Voice 17: or or be seen or turn your camera on there are a few opportunities including town hall

[0:06:38] Voice 17: will you have an opportunity to both address the local trust committee or address issues

[0:06:44] Voice 17: that are on our agenda or otherwise. And at that time, you'll be promoted and you'll have

[0:06:49] Voice 17: an opportunity to unmute yourself. And if you wish, turn your camera on so that we can see and

[0:06:54] Voice 17: hear you. As well, we have a delegation later today who will be able to present their materials.

[0:07:01] Voice 17: materials and when we get to the applications section and there are three applications on our

[0:07:10] Voice 17: agenda today the applicant will be able to well speak and turn their camera on and I know that

[0:07:17] Voice 17: one app in particular has a presentation they wish to a short presentation they wish to make

[0:07:22] Voice 17: so that will be possible as well but during the course of the meeting when other matters are going

[0:07:27] Voice 17: on, we will be, you will not be in a position to speak in here until you are promoted. So that's

[0:07:35] Voice 17: when you'll hear me talk to Maple and ask for certain people to be promoted just as a heads up.

[0:07:41] Voice 17: When you, when it's time for that to occur, you can raise your hand. You should see in the bottom

[0:07:48] Voice 17: of your screen, if presuming you're watching the webinar, a raised hand function and I will be able

[0:07:55] Voice 17: to see whether you have your hand raised and we can work our way through that way so thank you for

[0:08:00] Voice 17: bearing with us through this uh this electronic challenges um as i said we we're doing our best

[0:08:07] Voice 17: to try and um get to that that point of view um just a little bit about how we work because we

[0:08:14] Voice 17: have a number of people here and some names some names i recognize and some i don't um

[0:08:21] Voice 17: from the attendees list.

[0:08:23] Voice 17: We are the, as I said, the main Iowa local trust committee.

[0:08:26] Voice 17: The committee is made up of three trustees,

[0:08:29] Voice 17: trustee Dodds and trustee Motta,

[0:08:31] Voice 17: your locally elected trustees.

[0:08:32] Voice 17: And then under the islands trust act,

[0:08:34] Voice 17: one of the members of the executive,

[0:08:36] Voice 17: one of the chair or the vice chairs

[0:08:38] Voice 17: is assigned as the third trustee

[0:08:42] Voice 17: for the local trust committee.

[0:08:43] Voice 17: So that there was an odd number

[0:08:45] Voice 17: so that decisions can be made

[0:08:47] Voice 17: if the two local trustees don't necessarily agree

[0:08:52] Voice 17: or in any other circumstances.

[0:08:54] Voice 17: And I am that third member

[0:08:55] Voice 17: and I've been assigned as the vice chair,

[0:08:58] Voice 17: the chair of this particular local trust committee.

[0:09:01] Voice 17: My role is twofold.

[0:09:03] Voice 17: One is to run the meeting

[0:09:05] Voice 17: and work our way through the agenda,

[0:09:07] Voice 17: manage the flow of the meeting,

[0:09:09] Voice 17: make sure the business of the meeting gets done

[0:09:11] Voice 17: and answer process questions or procedural questions.

[0:09:17] Voice 17: As well, I'm a full member of the local trust committee and a voting trustee.

[0:09:21] Voice 17: And as we work our way through issues, you will hear me express my opinion from time to time and also engage in the voting process to the extent that we need to do that.

[0:09:34] Voice 17: I'm from, just so you know, I'm from Keats Island, Lek Tynes in the Squamish language, which is in Howe Sound, and I'm elected there in my second term.

[0:09:45] Voice 17: So I will be getting in a moment to the town hall and I have a few things to say about the town hall before we get into it.

[0:09:54] Voice 17: But in the meantime, I just remind you, this is a workplace and we always engage in a respectful dialog and communication here on on Main Island.

[0:10:05] Voice 17: So with that, those are my introductory remarks until we get to the town hall.

[0:10:10] Voice 17: all i'll turn to the two trustees and see if either of them wish to say anything uh or if you

[0:10:16] Voice 17: have anything you wish to add to the or

[0:10:18] Voice 10: change nothing

[0:10:22] Voice 3: thank you thanks

[0:10:25] Voice 17: very much um okay so

[0:10:27] Voice 17: then i'll take the agenda adopted as presented as as we will always be able to find our agenda on

[0:10:33] Voice 17: the newly revamped islands trust website um i don't know about anybody else but every time a

[0:10:39] Voice 17: a website changes it may be uh it it always takes me a little while to work figure my way through a

[0:10:46] Voice 17: new website and it looks fabulous and and i'm sure it'll be easier when once i've gotten used to it

[0:10:52] Voice 17: go and have a look you haven't been there yet islandstrust.bc.ca and it's it will look

[0:10:58] Voice 17: completely different however um so we have our agenda so the first item on the agenda is the

[0:11:04] Voice 17: Town Hall. And I want to say a couple of things about Town Hall before I ask for people to speak.

[0:11:13] Voice 17: So first of all, this is your opportunity to speak to us about anything that's on our agenda.

[0:11:18] Voice 17: If you're, as I said earlier, if you're an applicant, you needn't speak now, you'll have

[0:11:23] Voice 17: an opportunity to speak to the local trust committee and engage with us when your application

[0:11:30] Voice 17: is considered. But other than that, this is your opportunity to speak to something on the

[0:11:37] Voice 17: application. So for example, if you wish to speak to one of the applications, but you aren't the

[0:11:41] Voice 17: applicant, this is your time to do that. I do want to say two things. One is, I'm guessing it's

[0:11:50] Voice 17: reasonably well known on Maine Island, but there have been a number of emails, both in a form

[0:11:58] Voice 17: format and in another format, and sometimes individual ones related to the Maine Housing

[0:12:06] Voice 17: Society application. We have received those by the dozens. We have those available. I can't swear,

[0:12:17] Voice 17: I actually can't say in this circumstance, I've read them all because usually I do,

[0:12:22] Voice 17: but there were so many that then they often didn't be the same. If you're intending to speak to us

[0:12:29] Voice 17: about that, we've gotten your message related to your support for the application, so I encourage

[0:12:35] Voice 17: you not to simply repeat that. The second thing is I wanted to be clear, when we get to it I'll

[0:12:39] Voice 17: speak to this again, there is no motion on the table today related to any particular part of,

[0:12:44] Voice 17: except for one aspect of a referral to First Nations

[0:12:47] Voice 17: in our package today.

[0:12:51] Voice 17: So you should be cognizant of the fact

[0:12:54] Voice 17: that that's not there.

[0:12:56] Voice 17: So you needn't speak to that either.

[0:12:59] Voice 17: Having said that, I remind you that as you're speaking

[0:13:03] Voice 17: that we have rules of discussion here.

[0:13:08] Voice 17: This is a workplace for all of the staff that you will see.

[0:13:12] Voice 17: And it's also a workplace for the three of us

[0:13:14] Voice 17: that you see on your screen right now um this is our job um that we are elected true and we

[0:13:20] Voice 17: uh we are we are open to comments and commentary however we ask you to be respectful and and

[0:13:26] Voice 17: polite in your in your commentary please address any comments to the local trust

[0:13:31] Voice 17: committee um and to us as opposed to any staff or anyone else and and in particular um if you

[0:13:40] Voice 17: wish to ask a question address it to me and we'll figure out if there's a way we can get your

[0:13:44] Voice 17: question answered um we ask you not to speak to address your comments to anybody else in

[0:13:51] Voice 17: attendance uh this is not a forum for you to engage in discussions with members of your of

[0:13:57] Voice 17: the community please address your issues uh and not people uh and of course uh and i've never

[0:14:05] Voice 17: I've never experienced this on Maine,

[0:14:06] Voice 17: but I'll remind you that we expect

[0:14:09] Voice 17: that no one uses any inappropriate

[0:14:11] Voice 17: or otherwise abusive language, et cetera, et cetera.

[0:14:15] Voice 17: And so it's intended to be a safe

[0:14:18] Voice 17: and productive workplace for everyone involved.

[0:14:21] Voice 17: Okay, so having said all of that,

[0:14:23] Voice 17: I'm going to turn to the attendees

[0:14:28] Voice 17: and see who wishes to address the local trust committee.

[0:14:31] Voice 17: committee. I see two hands up. And so please, if you could promote Kat and I'm sorry, it looks like

[0:14:43] Voice 17: Fernie Hoff, but I may have mispronounced that. I apologize. And you should now be in a position

[0:14:51] Voice 17: to both unmute yourself and to, if you wish, turn your camera on. And there you are.

[0:14:58] Voice 17: Good afternoon.

[0:15:03] Voice 5: Thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak. I don't have any major

[0:15:08] Voice 5: questions, but I just wanted to speak in regards to the affordable housing situation. As I understand

[0:15:16] Voice 5: it, there's a question of whether the Main Island Affordable Housing Society will be able to rezone

[0:15:20] Voice 5: property for building their current plan project. I understand that the rezoning is not specifically

[0:15:26] Voice 5: based on the validity of the overall project, but I have some comments to make about the

[0:15:31] Voice 5: necessity of moving forward with this with as much expediency as possible.

[0:15:37] Voice 5: So this is not just to the trustees, but also I feel that anyone who's watching this,

[0:15:41] Voice 5: I hope you can hear what I have to say. I think one of the biggest hurdles for the

[0:15:47] Voice 5: Main Island Affordable Housing Project is a lack of understanding of what it will actually provide.

[0:15:52] Voice 5: affordable is a bit of a misnomer as what this is really is stable purpose-built rental housing

[0:15:58] Voice 5: rental space that will be available year-round rather than just in the cold months of the year

[0:16:03] Voice 5: rather than just while the owner is awaiting retirement rather than while the owner is away

[0:16:08] Voice 5: on sabbatical and it's designed for low to middle income people and families people who already live

[0:16:14] Voice 5: here who work full-time within our community for our local businesses this is about adding

[0:16:19] Voice 5: adding functional and necessary infrastructure to the heart of our village and not providing

[0:16:23] Voice 5: handouts. And currently, there is no rental housing on Main Island that will definitively

[0:16:28] Voice 5: remain rental housing, meaning anyone who cannot afford a $500,000 plus single family home will not

[0:16:34] Voice 5: be able to guarantee their future and live here full time year round. And this means that every

[0:16:39] Voice 5: business that requires employees on this island is at risk. There are simply not enough retirees

[0:16:45] Voice 5: in this community who want to do manual labor or service industry jobs in their spare time to

[0:16:49] Voice 5: support the needs of our local businesses and rental housing is a necessity in every community

[0:16:55] Voice 5: and it's astounding that this island has floated on the backs of people in unstable private market

[0:17:00] Voice 5: housing that has come and gone here as long as it has but we're currently at a breaking point

[0:17:05] Voice 5: i've seen in my eight years here countless people who have positively contributed to our community

[0:17:11] Voice 5: and businesses forced to leave due to lack of available rental housing not because they couldn't

[0:17:16] Voice 5: afford it, but just because there was nothing available to rent. My mother moved here to Maine

[0:17:22] Voice 5: in 2020. She and my youngest sister lived in a one-bedroom rental cottage while she worked three

[0:17:28] Voice 5: jobs and rolled change to buy groceries, and many people on Maine will know her well. She ended up

[0:17:33] Voice 5: purchasing the bookstore, sold it, and started Dragonfly Gallery, moved a recycled home to the

[0:17:39] Voice 5: island, and has been a major supporter of other islanders, including renting out what available

[0:17:43] Voice 5: space she had to dozens of people who have joined our community over the years.

[0:17:48] Voice 5: And her story couldn't happen now. The housing market has exploded to a level that would be

[0:17:53] Voice 5: impossible for her to ever afford to accomplish what she has in this last 20 years. And if it

[0:17:59] Voice 5: weren't for her, I wouldn't have been able to stay on Maine as well due to the rental shortage.

[0:18:04] Voice 5: And I've worked harder and maintained a higher income than I have anywhere in my adult life.

[0:18:10] Voice 5: i've never had less than three jobs at a time on this island what this island needs are stable

[0:18:17] Voice 5: rental units where our current residents can live without fear of losing their homes for

[0:18:21] Voice 5: reasons entirely out of their control a place where they can confidently and sustainably plan

[0:18:26] Voice 5: their future and participate in both the economy and the neighborly volunteer culture that we

[0:18:31] Voice 5: uphold here so just wanted to say those bits that's everything thank you so much for your time

[0:18:37] Voice 5: Thank

[0:18:38] Voice 17: you very much. I appreciate you keeping that relatively short and very concise and on point.

[0:18:44] Voice 17: So thank you very much. The next person is Andrew Smith.

[0:19:04] Voice 10: Hello. Hi,

[0:19:06] Voice 17: Andrew. You can hear me.

[0:19:07] Voice 17: I can hear you, Mr. Smith. Go ahead.

[0:19:09] Voice 1: Very good. I just want to talk briefly to point out the immense amount of work the Housing Society has put into this project.

[0:19:17] Voice 1: One instance is the Society's outreach to other islands.

[0:19:21] Voice 1: In my time on the board, we visited multiple communities to gather and share information about how to create successful affordable housing.

[0:19:29] Voice 1: We learned about working with the CRA and Lanka Acquisition from Denman, about water issues from Hornby.

[0:19:36] Voice 1: We saw how an RV park approach worked in Chimenas.

[0:19:40] Voice 1: On Salt Spring, we visited two projects and learned about housing agreements, amongst many other things.

[0:19:46] Voice 1: From Cortez, we received sample designs, and at Squamish, we saw how an affordable rental

[0:19:52] Voice 1: project is successfully managed. We've also shared knowledge with Galeano and Pender.

[0:19:57] Voice 1: This information has been incorporated in the plans and actions of the society,

[0:20:02] Voice 1: but working cooperatively with other communities is just one part of this very large effort.

[0:20:08] Voice 1: If people knew how much work has already gone into this, they'd be flabbergasted. My point is

[0:20:14] Voice 1: that our society has gathered a lot of expertise, has a lot of knowledge, and has access to the

[0:20:19] Voice 1: skills and capacities that will be required to finance, build, and operate a development that

[0:20:25] Voice 1: will benefit the island in many ways. Thank you for your time.

[0:20:29] Voice 17: Okay, thank you, Mr. Smith. I see

[0:20:35] Voice 17: we have a visitor from Galliano, Ms.

[0:20:40] Voice 10: Colleen Doty. All

[0:20:56] Voice 11: right, hello, good afternoon. Thank you for

[0:20:59] Voice 11: for allowing me to speak, Chair Rogers.

[0:21:01] Voice 11: Can you hear me okay?

[0:21:03] Voice 11: Can you hear me fine?

[0:21:04] Voice 11: Okay, great.

[0:21:06] Voice 11: So recognizing I am not a resident of Maine Island,

[0:21:10] Voice 11: I am from Galliano.

[0:21:11] Voice 11: I am a director on two different affordable housing boards.

[0:21:15] Voice 11: As you are likely aware,

[0:21:17] Voice 11: affordable housing providers are all paying attention

[0:21:20] Voice 11: to what is happening on other islands

[0:21:22] Voice 11: and in other jurisdictions.

[0:21:24] Voice 11: One of the housing societies I am involved with,

[0:21:27] Voice 11: the gulf islands galile affordable rental housing society or giggers has partnered with main island

[0:21:35] Voice 11: housing society on a fairly significant funding application we have been impressed with the

[0:21:40] Voice 11: professionalism and board capacity of main island housing society so i respectfully offer my

[0:21:47] Voice 11: comments and questions in my role as a director of an organization that is a partner of main island

[0:21:54] Voice 11: and Housing Society. And in this way, Giggers is an interested party here. So I have two questions

[0:22:00] Voice 11: for the local trustees. I'm curious whether proof of funding has ever been tied to approval

[0:22:07] Voice 11: of a rezoning or subdivision for a private developer on Maine. And secondly, why would

[0:22:15] Voice 11: proof of funding be on the table for discussion for a non-profit society and charitable organization

[0:22:21] Voice 11: in this case. So doing so would effectively be a poison pill for affordable housing.

[0:22:30] Voice 11: Created would be a catch-22 whereby no funder would want to fund a housing provider without

[0:22:37] Voice 11: secure land tenure. And given the limited resources of the Islands Trust, I respectfully submit that

[0:22:44] Voice 11: we let the funders who are the experts in affordable housing development do their due

[0:22:50] Voice 11: due diligence in assessing project viability

[0:22:52] Voice 11: and long-term sustainability.

[0:22:54] Voice 11: And the LTC meanwhile can focus on what it does best

[0:22:59] Voice 11: determining appropriate land use.

[0:23:01] Voice 11: Thank you for your consideration.

[0:23:03] Voice 11: Thank

[0:23:05] Voice 17: you, Ms. Doty.

[0:23:06] Voice 17: I see another name, another hand up.

[0:23:14] Voice 17: Mr. Traversy,

[0:23:16] Voice 10: Jim Traversy.

[0:23:40] Voice 10: Traversy, you should be in a position

[0:23:41] Voice 10: to unmute yourself now.

[0:23:47] Voice 17: You can hear me?

[0:23:48] Voice 10: yes

[0:23:49] Voice 17: i can and i think and you can turn your camera on if you wish you don't have to if you

[0:23:53] Voice 17: don't want oh and

[0:23:56] Voice 17: i can hear you there you are oh you were there uh

[0:24:02] Voice 2: there we go sorry about this

[0:24:06] Voice 2: i'm new to the zoom thing uh thanks for letting me speak my name is jim traversi i've been a part of

[0:24:13] Voice 2: the main island community for 22 years now as a renter and also a worker at a main island

[0:24:21] Voice 2: in business for 10 years and as a self-employed artist before that i wanted to address what

[0:24:27] Voice 2: appears to be a possible threat to the housing society getting the zoning they seek it seems

[0:24:33] Voice 2: like this trust council is now asking this question if funding should be fully in place for

[0:24:39] Voice 2: the ltc to grant the rezoning opponents think it should be but they also say that rental housing is

[0:24:46] Voice 2: a wonderful thing and very necessary, but just not in this place. Now I think that I recently

[0:24:55] Voice 2: looked at the OCP and it says right in it that we're supposed to support diverse and vital

[0:25:06] Voice 2: community structure through effective housing policies for affordability, long-term rental

[0:25:10] Voice 2: opportunities and special needs. I then looked through the OCP to see if there was anything about

[0:25:16] Voice 2: funding having to be in place and couldn't find it so i just wanted to clearly state here that

[0:25:23] Voice 2: for because the because the funding depends on having the land and zoning in place if the ltc

[0:25:39] Voice 2: considers requiring funding before rezoning, this is effectively going to kill the rental

[0:25:48] Voice 2: housing project. As was said earlier, any trustees who vote in favor of such a motion,

[0:25:54] Voice 2: if the motion were to happen, would be voting to kill the rental housing project. I just

[0:25:59] Voice 2: hope that none of you guys are going to do that. As has been said here, you know, housing is a huge

[0:26:09] Voice 2: need. And there's, there's really no reason I can see anywhere that, that this is being brought up

[0:26:19] Voice 2: other than, other than something on the internet called concern trolling, which is the action or

[0:26:25] Voice 2: or practice of disingenuously expressing concern

[0:26:28] Voice 2: about an issue in order to undermine

[0:26:30] Voice 2: or derail genuine discussion.

[0:26:33] Voice 2: And I think that's exactly what we're looking at

[0:26:35] Voice 2: with this question.

[0:26:36] Voice 2: I think that the opponents to this don't care

[0:26:42] Voice 2: if the housing society has funding or whatever,

[0:26:45] Voice 2: they just want to set up a situation

[0:26:46] Voice 2: where the project-

[0:26:48] Voice 2: I

[0:26:48] Voice 17: did ask you not to sort of characterize

[0:26:52] Voice 17: other people's actions.

[0:26:53] Voice 2: Okay, pardon me.

[0:26:54] Voice 2: would ask you

[0:26:54] Voice 17: not to do that thank

[0:26:55] Voice 2: you yeah sorry i'm new to this that's okay

[0:26:57] Voice 17: okay anyway

[0:27:01] Voice 2: i'll just sum up and say i'm just asking the ltc to to go forward with as much

[0:27:08] Voice 2: chase as possible because this is a necessary project thank you very much sorry

[0:27:17] Voice 17: i don't see

[0:27:18] Voice 17: any other hands up thank you mr traversy uh for anybody else wishing to speak at this point in

[0:27:24] Voice 17: in time we do have a second town hall at the end of the meeting and of course I did indicate that

[0:27:33] Voice 17: if you're an applicant you can speak I'm just sort of vamping for a minute to see if anybody else

[0:27:39] Voice 17: okay so presuming everybody knows where the hand is I'm going to then thank everybody for their

[0:27:44] Voice 17: comments and we're going to close the town hall and move on in the agenda thank you very much

[0:27:54] Voice 17: so uh that takes us to there is no cim today public no public hearing we have the local

[0:28:01] Voice 17: trust committee minutes from uh march 29th for adoption uh was there anything arising for other

[0:28:09] Voice 17: the trustees nothing then we'll take those adopted and presented we have two section uh resolutions

[0:28:15] Voice 17: without meeting that were presented uh to us that these are these are votes just for you know that

[0:28:21] Voice 17: that we occasionally do take votes on matters

[0:28:26] Voice 17: without conducting a meeting.

[0:28:28] Voice 17: We don't engage in debate.

[0:28:30] Voice 17: Those matters do come up from time to time

[0:28:33] Voice 17: and there are two of them and then we report them later

[0:28:35] Voice 17: and they're on page 11.

[0:28:39] Voice 17: So unless there's something to the trustees arising,

[0:28:42] Voice 17: there's simply there for information.

[0:28:44] Voice 17: And the next matter is the follow-up action list,

[0:28:47] Voice 17: which is on page 12 of the agenda.

[0:28:53] Voice 17: Uh, nurses, Planner Chadwick, is there anything you want to flag for us from the follow-up action

[0:28:59] Voice 17: list?

[0:29:00] Voice 18: Um, no, there isn't, uh, Chair Rogers. The, the one item that's incomplete, I followed up with

[0:29:07] Voice 18: you, um, already, so I think we're good.

[0:29:09] Voice 17: Is that the covenant?

[0:29:11] Voice 18: That's the covenant, yeah. So the

[0:29:12] Voice 18: lawyers are just working to complete that.

[0:29:15] Voice 17: Yeah, I'm supposed to go over to their offices tomorrow

[0:29:17] Voice 17: tomorrow and hopefully it's ready.

[0:29:19] Voice 17: Maybe the third time lucky.

[0:29:22] Voice 9: Okay,

[0:29:25] Voice 17: do either of the trustees have any questions

[0:29:26] Voice 17: related to the follow-up action list?

[0:29:28] Voice 17: Seeing nothing, then we're very pleased

[0:29:31] Voice 17: to have a delegation today.

[0:29:32] Voice 17: And I know that the delegate is here,

[0:29:37] Voice 17: just that it's Justine Stark from the CRD, I believe.

[0:29:41] Voice 17: So if I'm not getting correct,

[0:29:44] Voice 17: correct. If that's right, can we promote Justine and say welcome, Justine. Nice to see you. Justine

[0:29:54] Voice 17: did work with the Islands Trust for, actually, I don't know how for how long.

[0:30:00] Voice 17: was certainly there in my first term and has moved on to be to work for the CRD, a good friend of the

[0:30:07] Voice 17: trust and of all the islands but I'll let Justine introduce herself. Hello. Hi,

[0:30:15] Voice 6: thank you, thanks

[0:30:16] Voice 6: for that.

[0:30:17] Voice 17: Very nice to see you again.

[0:30:19] Voice 6: Thank you for that nice introduction. Yeah so I'm here

[0:30:23] Voice 6: today to introduce to the local trust committee in the community of Maine Island a project that

[0:30:29] Voice 6: that I'm really excited to be working on

[0:30:30] Voice 6: with the Capital Regional District

[0:30:32] Voice 6: and that's a made on SGI transportation integration plan.

[0:30:38] Voice 6: So this isn't the same as the regional trail

[0:30:42] Voice 6: that the regional park division is building on Maine Island

[0:30:45] Voice 6: which is part of a regional connection network

[0:30:48] Voice 6: across the islands and networked with the bigger CRD

[0:30:53] Voice 6: beyond the islands.

[0:30:55] Voice 6: Back, I think, a couple of years ago, the Southern Gulf Islands Community Economic Sustainability Commission requested that the CRD create a transportation commission.

[0:31:06] Voice 6: And that was in order to provide a fossil fuel free way of traveling across the islands and providing public transit and meeting community needs in an integrated way.

[0:31:18] Voice 6: and so within a regional district model to have a commission you first need to establish a service

[0:31:27] Voice 6: so a commission is usually appointed representatives of a community who advise on the delivery of a

[0:31:33] Voice 6: service so what we're looking at doing is is costing out different service models for what

[0:31:42] Voice 6: what an integrated transportation service might look like and to this end we've launched this

[0:31:50] Voice 6: project we're calling it transportation integration because integration is an important part of it

[0:31:55] Voice 6: we'd like to find out how much it would cost to supplement a public transit service

[0:32:03] Voice 6: with an active transportation network and also provide inter-island travel between the islands

[0:32:08] Voice 6: So we've hired Watt Consulting to assist us with this, and we've been conducting meetings with stakeholders and community groups who have expertise.

[0:32:17] Voice 6: So, for example, the Maine Islands, what is it, Mpata and the Maine Islands Park and Trail Society, Pathways and Trail Society is a group that we've met with,

[0:32:29] Voice 6: as well as some water taxi service providers

[0:32:32] Voice 6: and the community bus societies on each of the island.

[0:32:38] Voice 6: And the goal is to understand a service level

[0:32:41] Voice 6: and a cost for a transportation service

[0:32:45] Voice 6: and to understand what the CRD's role should be

[0:32:48] Voice 6: as minimally as possible to ensure an affordable service

[0:32:54] Voice 6: that can be provided by probably a mix of nonprofit organizations, private operators, and Capital Regional Districts.

[0:33:04] Voice 6: So, the community buses that have been piloted on the islands, we've learned that they're just on the edge of viability.

[0:33:13] Voice 6: And they have a shortfall of operating funding to be sustainable. It would be good to be able to pay drivers to be sustainable.

[0:33:20] Voice 6: and or there might be advantage to having a BC transit service on the southern gulf islands like

[0:33:27] Voice 6: they have on salt spring so we're going to be doing a comparative analysis of those two different

[0:33:32] Voice 6: models the inter-island passenger ferry would depend on integrating with public transit but

[0:33:40] Voice 6: the idea is to supplement BC ferries so that folks can move between the islands without having to go

[0:33:45] Voice 6: to Swartz Bay and take all day to do so we think and we've heard so far in our engagement that

[0:33:51] Voice 6: this would really support labor moving between the islands and also given the housing crisis

[0:33:57] Voice 6: that you're hearing about and that's on all of the islands it would enable you know workers to

[0:34:02] Voice 6: live on one island and work on another and get back again at the end of the day there's

[0:34:08] Voice 6: um so there's information on our website and i've got some links i'll put in the chat but

[0:34:15] Voice 6: we're just at the beginning stage of this we will be going into um we're doing like stakeholder

[0:34:20] Voice 6: consultation and more targeted consultation with the different modes of transportation

[0:34:27] Voice 6: and then we're going to be doing once we have some information to present to the community

[0:34:32] Voice 6: um in the fall we're going to be going to a more broader conversation and hopefully we'll be able

[0:34:38] Voice 6: to have some in-person meetings but we'll definitely be hosting some zoom town halls

[0:34:41] Voice 6: as well as we're developing like a web platform where people can interact and do some community

[0:34:47] Voice 6: mapping um and so at the end of the day in order to establish a service under the regional district

[0:34:55] Voice 6: model uh you need voter assent so we're trying to get a report that ha that will withstand the

[0:35:01] Voice 6: scrutiny of a referendum process for the 2022 ballot so that will be a question on the ballot

[0:35:08] Voice 6: do you support a transportation service model and then it'll have the kind of recommended whatever

[0:35:14] Voice 6: the recommendations are of the study that that kind of come out of also the community engagement

[0:35:19] Voice 6: will give the voters a chance to decide whether or not they want to support that with a tax

[0:35:26] Voice 6: requisition and obviously we want to develop something that's going to going to be for

[0:35:31] Voice 6: affordable so that we can improve service on the islands through that process but it'll be up to

[0:35:36] Voice 6: the voters to decide so I'll just pop we've got like we're at the beginning of the process we've

[0:35:41] Voice 6: got the website it's just got one frequently asked questions on it and this is me kind of

[0:35:49] Voice 6: introducing the project to the main island community and to the local trust community

[0:35:52] Voice 6: community committee and happy to answer questions and give you feedback offline or

[0:35:59] Voice 6: take your comments offline and have you be as involved in the process as you want to be

[0:36:05] Voice 6: so happy to answer questions now if you want okay

[0:36:09] Voice 17: so and there's the link i i assume the

[0:36:12] Voice 17: the attendees can see the chat functioning can see that link i don't know the answer to that

[0:36:19] Voice 17: technically actually um but uh let me just do this let me ask the trustees first of all if they have

[0:36:26] Voice 17: any comments or questions but

[0:36:29] Voice 3: don't really have any questions at all this started off with the

[0:36:33] Voice 3: community bus which unfortunately with covid you know has been basically parked for over a year now

[0:36:39] Voice 3: um so i i do think if you're going to go to referendum in a little over a year from now um

[0:36:46] Voice 3: it may be bad timing in that the sort of people have changed their travel

[0:36:51] Voice 3: patterns and habits have changed.

[0:36:53] Voice 3: So that would just be one concern I would have.

[0:36:56] Voice 3: Certainly the community bus for main Island tried a door to door service and

[0:37:01] Voice 3: we're different. Each Island is very different.

[0:37:03] Voice 3: And of course that was just a huge gas guzzler money waster.

[0:37:07] Voice 3: So I do hope that whatever comes out is a more practical basis of,

[0:37:13] Voice 3: of what actual day-to-day needs are for full-time residents rather right now it's basically if the

[0:37:19] Voice 3: bus is used it's used for commuters coming in from vancouver most of the time but it's not of course

[0:37:24] Voice 3: this year thank you

[0:37:27] Voice 17: trustee ma do you have any comments yeah go ahead i

[0:37:31] Trustee Maude: just um look forward to

[0:37:33] Trustee Maude: seeing the the final report and um understanding some of the costs i i know bc transit had done

[0:37:39] Trustee Maude: similar work a few years ago and the numbers were not not all that positive so I think that the

[0:37:47] Trustee Maude: asset of some sort of linking of the islands and some sort of commuter bus service is really really

[0:37:54] Trustee Maude: nice but it always comes down to the dollars and when going to referendum very much so comes down

[0:38:00] Trustee Maude: to the dollars and hopefully there's there is an economical solution that makes it work so

[0:38:06] Trustee Maude: So the program can work.

[0:38:07] Trustee Maude: Thank you.

[0:38:10] Trustee Maude: Yeah,

[0:38:10] Voice 6: thank you for those comments and good points.

[0:38:12] Voice 6: Thanks.

[0:38:12] Voice 6: Sorry.

[0:38:13] Voice 17: If it's all right with you, Justine,

[0:38:14] Voice 17: I'll just see if anybody in the community

[0:38:17] Voice 17: wants to ask you a question

[0:38:18] Voice 17: because they don't always get a chance to,

[0:38:21] Voice 17: I mean, they can call you,

[0:38:23] Voice 17: but this is a public forum

[0:38:24] Voice 17: and we don't always have anybody.

[0:38:26] Voice 17: Is anybody that's an attendee

[0:38:28] Voice 17: wish to ask a question about the program?

[0:38:31] Voice 17: By the way, the outline is on Paige's,

[0:38:34] Voice 17: uh um sorry it's on page 14 and 15 of the agenda package there's a two-page outline with i think

[0:38:44] Voice 17: what justin indicated was uh was the uh frequently asked questions that it's there so i'll just give

[0:38:51] Voice 17: anybody an opportunity if anybody's interested in asking a question at this stage or just

[0:38:55] Voice 17: i guess you'll wait to see and i'm quite sure the community will engage with you as this

[0:39:01] Voice 17: this important conversation goes forward, is the, I assume the, what was it called?

[0:39:08] Voice 17: Help me here, Janine.

[0:39:09] Voice 17: What was the thing that George Harris was working on?

[0:39:13] Voice 3: There was Experience the Gulf Islands was one long-term project.

[0:39:18] Voice 3: The

[0:39:18] Voice 17: Tour de Ile, wasn't it?

[0:39:19] Voice 17: Yeah, the

[0:39:20] Voice 3: Tour de Ile is like three days late in June, which is, you know, a wonderful way

[0:39:25] Voice 3: to bring the communities together on a yearly basis.

[0:39:27] Voice 3: And support for that, I think, is really worthwhile because you make connections.

[0:39:32] Voice 3: My concern would be trying to provide a 365-day of the year service.

[0:39:37] Voice 17: I remember

[0:39:38] Voice 3: the

[0:39:41] Voice 17: mayor of Sydney was quite keen on this as well.

[0:39:46] Voice 3: He'd like us all to do our shopping in Sydney.

[0:39:49] Voice 17: Anyway, I do

[0:39:50] Voice 17: have one hand.

[0:39:52] Voice 17: Debra Goldman, if you have a question, please unmute Debra and give her a chance to ask a question.

[0:40:01] Voice 17: Yes, go ahead.

[0:40:02] Voice 17: good

[0:40:02] Voice 7: thank you very much um i'm speaking now as the main island uh commissioner to the community

[0:40:08] Voice 7: economic sustainability commission and also one of the facilitators of the designing the future

[0:40:14] Voice 7: of main island project that was um last year on main island and transportation inter-island

[0:40:22] Voice 7: transportation was one of the seven vectors that was selected by the community as being very

[0:40:27] Voice 7: important to the sustainability of our island and we really are happy that this

[0:40:33] Voice 7: is moving forward and and that the research is is is being done right now

[0:40:40] Voice 7: on that and that it's moved beyond main island this time and is being taken up

[0:40:46] Voice 7: by the southern Gulf Islands and the CRD so speaking as a commissioner for the

[0:40:51] Voice 7: the CESC were very hopeful of this

[0:40:54] Voice 7: and are looking forward to the results.

[0:40:57] Voice 7: Thank you.

[0:40:58] Voice 17: Thanks for your comments.

[0:40:59] Voice 17: Okay.

[0:41:00] Voice 17: I don't see any other hands up.

[0:41:01] Voice 17: So thanks for introducing this to us, Justine.

[0:41:04] Voice 17: And we look forward to hearing more going forward.

[0:41:07] Voice 17: I'm sure that it's, I guess this is a project

[0:41:11] Voice 17: that involves all of the Southern Gulf Islands, I assume.

[0:41:14] Voice 17: Including Salt Spring, I assume.

[0:41:16] Voice 17: Because I'm guessing that would be the main focal point

[0:41:19] Voice 17: of transportation with people in salt spring

[0:41:21] Voice 6: salt spring has an existing transportation service so

[0:41:26] Voice 6: there might be integration with the water based mode that we're proposing obviously that salt

[0:41:32] Voice 6: springs an important link and there's already a link provided with the school district's

[0:41:36] Voice 6: uh water taxi for the students who travel to salt spring so we're yeah salt spring's part of it but

[0:41:43] Voice 6: we're and we might be looking to how they've um how they design their transportation service as

[0:41:49] Voice 6: as an example for what might work

[0:41:50] Voice 6: on the Southern Gulf Islands, but they're not,

[0:41:52] Voice 6: it wouldn't, it would be just for the electoral area

[0:41:54] Voice 6: of Southern Gulf Islands,

[0:41:56] Voice 6: which is Maine, Galliano, Saturna and Pender.

[0:41:58] Voice 17: Well, I'll see you again on Galliano, I'm sure.

[0:42:01] Voice 6: Yeah, okay, good.

[0:42:02] Voice 6: Thank you for having me.

[0:42:04] Voice 17: Thanks very much for coming, I appreciate it.

[0:42:07] Voice 17: All right, well, that's our delegation.

[0:42:09] Voice 17: There's a lot of correspondence,

[0:42:12] Voice 17: but it's not on our agenda today.

[0:42:16] Voice 17: because almost all of it related to specific applications

[0:42:24] Voice 17: and will appear eventually in the applications folder

[0:42:28] Voice 17: that's there before us.

[0:42:29] Voice 17: So we're on to applications referrals.

[0:42:33] Voice 17: Hello, Planner Custom Mail.

[0:42:35] Voice 17: So I know that we have the applicant,

[0:42:40] Voice 17: Mr. Allison and Ms. Casey with us.

[0:42:42] Voice 17: I saw them in the...

[0:42:46] Voice 17: it's under ma maple um and so what i would ask is if you could promote them but i'll ask them to

[0:42:53] Voice 17: leave their camera off for the moment and uh their their microphone off and the way we'll

[0:43:01] Voice 17: work our way through this uh application as with all applications is that we'll ask the planner

[0:43:06] Voice 17: present his report and the trustees will then ask

[0:43:13] Voice 17: any clarifying questions they may have regarding

[0:43:16] Voice 17: the staff report and the nature of any recommendations.

[0:43:22] Voice 17: After that, I'll then ask the applicant

[0:43:26] Voice 17: if they wish to address and I know in this case,

[0:43:28] Voice 17: the applicant does wish to address the staff report

[0:43:31] Voice 17: and actually has a slide presentation they wish to make.

[0:43:37] Voice 17: And then we'll ask any questions of the applicant

[0:43:42] Voice 17: and then we'll return to our discussion amongst ourselves

[0:43:47] Voice 17: and come to a conclusion.

[0:43:49] Voice 17: So over to you, Planner Tester.

[0:43:52] Planner: Thank you, Chair Rogers.

[0:43:54] Planner: So this is a combined development permit

[0:43:58] Planner: and development variance permit application,

[0:43:59] Planner: D.P. 2020.2 and D.V.P. 2020.9 for 539 Dalton Drive in Village Bay.

[0:44:09] Planner: And just to start, apology, the first on the header of the actual report, there's an autofill section and it indicates North Pender.

[0:44:18] Planner: And of course, this is addressed to the Maine Island Local Trust Committee, not North Pender.

[0:44:23] Planner: So as I said, this is a combined application.

[0:44:25] Planner: The purpose of the development permit application is for measures for the protection of sensitive ecosystem and construction management for a proposed elevated walkway or bridge within the designated riparian area development permit area.

[0:44:41] Planner: The DVP application is to consider variances to the setback provisions in the main island land use bylaw for the same proposed construction.

[0:44:50] Planner: So, the stated purpose of the application is to provide improved access to a small waterfront portion of the subject property.

[0:45:01] Planner: So, in referring to figures 2 and 3, which are on page 19 and 20 of the agenda package, and photos that have overlays, which are attachment 2.5, which are on page 30 and 31 of the agenda package,

[0:45:15] Planner: The details of the proposal are, I'll just summarize them here, so it's to be a or it's proposed a 1.22 meter by 12.2 meter long wood or aluminum clear span walkway structure with a minimum clearance of 0.61 meters above the high watermark of Deacon Creek and the walkway would also include guardrails which have not been shown, they are shown on graphically shown on the overlay which is part of the attachment.

[0:45:45] Planner: to support it on either side of the creek on log, timber, Gambian cage or concrete foundations,

[0:45:54] Planner: which would be constructed without heavy machinery, and the walkway would transition to the ground

[0:46:01] Planner: on the waterfront side using a berm ramp steps, sorry, or steps and would connect on the main

[0:46:07] Planner: property through a stone and gravel walkway.

[0:46:10] Planner: the siting of the walkway would be on a 4.26 meter wide narrow corridor

[0:46:19] Planner: that extends from the main portion of the property to the foreshore of Village Bay and the applicant

[0:46:26] Planner: has indicated that the construction would involve minimal soil and vegetation removal

[0:46:31] Planner: the removal of mature sorry a mature big leaf maple tree on the waterfront side planting of

[0:46:38] Planner: replacement saplings and removal of invasive species so the applicant has provided um an

[0:46:45] Planner: addendum document to the application uh sorry there's a typo uh which stated in the report

[0:46:51] Planner: that it was attachment one it was actually attachment three that's on page 32 to 40 of

[0:46:57] Planner: the agenda package property is about sorry approximately or is 0.24 hectares in size and

[0:47:06] Planner: that's located on Village Bay and is adjacent to the east boundary of the Village Bay Community

[0:47:12] Planner: Park. So just quickly addressing the background of the development permit area. So the riparian

[0:47:20] Planner: DPA is designated on the property with a specific objective to protect the biological diversity and

[0:47:27] Planner: habitat values of aquatic ecosystems. That mapped DPA area is shown in figure two on page 19 of the

[0:47:36] Planner: agenda package and includes an area of the property where the walkway is proposed

[0:47:42] Planner: however the provincial riparian areas protection or wrapper regulation does not apply to tidal

[0:47:49] Planner: waters so the upper limit of tidal influence is shown with a red dot and it's just upstream of

[0:47:55] Planner: the proposed works given that there's no requirement for the applicant or the applicant's

[0:48:01] Planner: qualified environmental professional to submit to the province, which is a normal course with

[0:48:09] Planner: an application of this type. Notwithstanding the application, or sorry, the proposed work

[0:48:18] Planner: still require that a DP be obtained from the local trust committee. So in addition, they are

[0:48:26] Planner: required under the Water Sustainability Act under section 11 to post

[0:48:32] Planner: notification for works in and about a stream before they can proceed so

[0:48:37] Planner: quickly the applicants hired Madrone Environmental Services and they've

[0:48:42] Planner: submitted an environmental management plan which is attachment 4 and it's on

[0:48:48] Planner: page 41 to 73 of the report and that does conclude that the

[0:48:55] Planner: the construction would represent a project

[0:48:58] Planner: with minimal risks, and I'm quoting,

[0:49:00] Planner: to the stream and the surrounding riparian area.

[0:49:03] Planner: However, given staff's recommendation

[0:49:05] Planner: that our recommendation is on page one

[0:49:09] Planner: and the fact that the consultation is pending,

[0:49:12] Planner: which I'll talk about in a bit,

[0:49:14] Planner: a development permit was not prepared for this report.

[0:49:17] Planner: That would be done with a subsequent report to the LTC

[0:49:21] Planner: if an alternative to proceed is chosen.

[0:49:26] Planner: Back to the development variance permit, the requested variances are for the proposed walkway structure, and they are shown on figure four of page 21, and these are required to reduce the setbacks for the structure from a minimum of 7.5 meters to zero meters from the natural boundary of a water course.

[0:49:51] Planner: And secondly, to reduce the interior side yard setbacks from 3 to 1.7 meters for the same structure.

[0:50:05] Planner: So considering the rationale that has been provided for the variances, again, the applicant's addendum includes a rationale section.

[0:50:13] Planner: And briefly, that states that the configuration of the property with a small isolated area from the main portion of the property, the need for safe access to all parts of the property at all times of the year, and difficulty and safety in assessing the waterfront portion, either by fording the creek or through the park and the public foreshore, which would be the beach.

[0:50:38] Planner: staff's comments are that with the while the rationale of improved access has merit on balance

[0:50:44] Planner: it's of the opinion that the rationale is not supportable as firstly the absence of the

[0:50:50] Planner: structure to date has not provided sorry prohibited in the enjoyment of the property

[0:50:55] Planner: but rather made access inconvenient or limiting and only at certain times and with certain weather

[0:51:03] Planner: conditions and tide conditions. Pardon me. By site visit staff assessed the area of the property is

[0:51:18] Planner: accessible via crossing the low magnitude stream at the weir or downstream or down on the beach

[0:51:26] Planner: and up an established rock step which has been carried on for quite some time now with the

[0:51:32] Planner: current applicants and previous applicants. So without discounting safety issues that have

[0:51:37] Planner: been cited it does not appear that the proposal of anything less impactful by means of crossing

[0:51:44] Planner: the weir or beach are acceptable to the applicant secondly the scale of the project is disproportionate

[0:51:50] Planner: to the need indicated with the rationale and that's shown in referencing the photo overlays

[0:51:57] Planner: which are attachment 2.5 and lastly the property was purchased in its current state with knowledge

[0:52:05] Planner: of the limitations for access to that portion and that should not lead to an expectation that the

[0:52:11] Planner: approvals would be granted for this proposal quickly considering impacts on neighboring

[0:52:17] Planner: properties the walkways location and size will have visual impacts both for one of the neighboring

[0:52:23] Planner: properties in particular and also for the from the public realm so that would be the village bay

[0:52:28] Planner: community park and of course the public foreshore the report staff report also notes a growing

[0:52:35] Planner: concern over the proliferation of infrastructure and structures on the foreshore, such as private

[0:52:41] Planner: docks and other structures. And this is not only specific to Main Island, but is a concern for the

[0:52:48] Planner: trust area in general. And in terms of impacts, also consultation has indicated that the lack

[0:53:00] Planner: of delineation between the park and subject property may lead to trespass onto the subject

[0:53:06] Planner: property and the walkway and in order to limit that we may include signage or even fencing which

[0:53:13] Planner: would have further visual impacts considering the impact on the water course in the riparian

[0:53:19] Planner: ecosystem so the environmental management plan does endorse the proposal as i stated earlier

[0:53:25] Planner: but it does not address potential geotechnical issues such as bank stability

[0:53:30] Planner: and the erosion of that sorry with Deacon Creek nor does it address potential impacts of extreme

[0:53:39] Planner: tidal and weather events and sea change sea level change on the structure and both of these aspects

[0:53:45] Planner: could result in damage to the sensitive ecosystem and should be taken into consideration so the

[0:53:53] Planner: The intent of the regulations is stated on page 24 of the staff report, and staff's opinion

[0:54:04] Planner: is that the variances, particularly for the setback to the water course, challenge the

[0:54:10] Planner: intent of the by-law regulations.

[0:54:12] Planner: As I said a few times, there has been consultation.

[0:54:16] Planner: There is no consultation required with the DP application, however, notices and the draft

[0:54:21] Planner: DDP sorry development variance permit were circulated to surrounding neighbors as required

[0:54:27] Planner: at this time we've received seven submissions in response to that and all are opposed

[0:54:34] Planner: the application and I can just quickly summarize the concerns those are visual impacts

[0:54:41] Planner: concerns about ongoing bank erosion creek geomorphology and sultation in Deakin Creek

[0:54:48] Planner: public access and unattended trespass impacts on the creek and the natural interface between

[0:54:54] Planner: the public and private realm impacts on a fish bearing stream or slash habitat with no public

[0:54:59] Planner: benefit and impacts from the title action and impacts of climate change just to note as i've

[0:55:08] Planner: said the village bay community park is a neighbor and they would have received the crd would have

[0:55:14] Planner: received notification um uh as we as as part of the mail out we also took the step of um referring

[0:55:21] Planner: uh to the crd manager of southern gulf islands service delivery justine who we've just heard from

[0:55:28] Planner: requesting that it be forwarded to the parks commission unfortunately that email was overlooked

[0:55:32] Planner: and the parks commission uh by the time they received this which is only on friday uh did

[0:55:38] Planner: did not have time to review that.

[0:55:41] Planner: So the applicant in a submission also summarizes consultation

[0:55:47] Planner: that they had with their direct neighbor,

[0:55:49] Planner: which is at 535 Dalton and with the Parks Commission.

[0:55:53] Planner: Lastly, to address First Nations and archeological issues.

[0:55:58] Planner: So the Islands Trust reviewed the application

[0:56:00] Planner: to ensure the preservation and protection

[0:56:01] Planner: of cultural heritage, archeological sites

[0:56:04] Planner: and ancestral places and its consistency

[0:56:07] Planner: with the Islands Trust Reconciliation Declaration

[0:56:11] Planner: and the LTC's standing resolutions

[0:56:14] Planner: on implementation of UNDRIP.

[0:56:17] Planner: There is close proximity of a registered archeological site

[0:56:21] Planner: and mapping of high potential for archeological resources

[0:56:24] Planner: where the actual walkway is proposed.

[0:56:27] Planner: So in addition, there was a, or we were advised

[0:56:31] Planner: that there was a complaint made by First Nation

[0:56:34] Planner: to the province about the proposal there's some confusion about this um it does appear that their

[0:56:40] Planner: complaint was about potentially about um a walk that or sorry a site assessment that was being

[0:56:47] Planner: done by the parks commission for improvements to a small walkway over over um what i believe

[0:56:55] Planner: leave as a smaller drainage ditch. Notwithstanding, and on the basis of the mapping, staff referred

[0:57:04] Planner: the notice and the draft DVP to the Sartlip First Nation and the Masonic Leadership Council,

[0:57:10] Planner: as well as to the archaeological branch. The applicant, just to note, made a site data

[0:57:18] Planner: request in 2020 to the archaeology branch and was told that they were not required to obtain

[0:57:22] Planner: a permit because they're outside of the registered or the registered site however that response did

[0:57:30] Planner: strongly recommend having a permit in place prior to subsurface work in instances of near conflict

[0:57:36] Planner: with registered archaeological sites. So at this time staff has not received any response

[0:57:43] Planner: from the referral to First Nations nor from the archaeology branch. So the recommendation on page

[0:58:00] Planner: The rationale for the recommendation is that although access has merit, the absence of such a structure would not prohibit the use and enjoyment of that portion of the property.

[0:58:11] Planner: The scale of the project is disproportionate to the rationale of access and options remain for the owner and consumer.

[0:58:20] Planner: including the status quo.

[0:58:22] Planner: Potential unknown impacts from granting the variances

[0:58:24] Planner: on balance outweigh the benefit to the owner.

[0:58:27] Planner: The variances, particularly the setbacks

[0:58:30] Planner: from the water course,

[0:58:31] Planner: challenge the intent of the by-law provisions.

[0:58:34] Planner: Notification to surrounding neighbors have been undertaken

[0:58:36] Planner: and to date all responses oppose the variances.

[0:58:41] Planner: First Nations concerns over impacts

[0:58:43] Planner: to known archeological sites

[0:58:45] Planner: and in the area of high archeological potential

[0:58:48] Planner: and a registered archeological site

[0:58:49] Planner: does not comply with the Islands Trust Reconciliation Declaration or the Main Island

[0:58:55] Planner: Local Trust Committee's Standing Resolution on the Implementation of UNDRIP or the Islands Trust

[0:59:00] Planner: Object that Cultural Heritage is a unique amenity to preserved and protected. Determining potential

[0:59:07] Planner: geotechnical impacts requires more information and similarly determining potential impacts

[0:59:14] Planner: to the sensitive ecosystem resulting from the susceptibility of the structure to climate change

[0:59:19] Planner: impacts such as storm surge title and sea level rise also requires more information so not so

[0:59:27] Planner: brief but that was my summary of my report there are alternatives that have been provided on the

[0:59:33] Planner: final pages of the staff report okay

[0:59:40] Voice 10: so uh trustees

[0:59:42] Voice 17: questions for the planner yeah trustee

[0:59:45] Voice 17: um

[0:59:46] Trustee Maude: just a couple of questions um one is it's a we speak of the existing fording of the creek

[0:59:54] Trustee Maude: which is basically walking down the bank, through the creek, up the bank to access the property.

[1:00:00] Trustee Maude: does that not existing use present some concerns with regard to um basically the

[1:00:06] Trustee Maude: degradation of the bank and and the um the fish habitat um and the second question is is that the

[1:00:14] Trustee Maude: proponents provided some photographs of um a previous structure was basically like two logs

[1:00:20] Trustee Maude: and um boards on it as a as a crossing if that was to be reconstructed is that permitted um just

[1:00:30] Trustee Maude: trying to get sort of an idea of the lay of the land thank you so

[1:00:33] Planner: in answer to the first question

[1:00:35] Planner: um so my my there what is there at the weir is a concrete pad um and the applicants will be able

[1:00:45] Planner: to provide you with some more information on this as well i just presume i haven't actually been to

[1:00:50] Planner: the site narissa chadwick has and previous planner gary richardson um but crossing that um concrete

[1:00:58] Planner: The concrete pad, this is where the stream is exiting through the weir, does not appear to be overly complicated.

[1:01:07] Planner: Of course, as I stated in my report, we're not trying to dismiss safety issues, but this is not an area, that's not an area that's environmentally sensitive.

[1:01:18] Planner: Likewise in times of low tide or lower tides using the beach and essentially jumping across

[1:01:26] Planner: the stream or walking across the stream would not provide any or sorry present any environmental

[1:01:33] Planner: damage. If they were to try and ford the stream where they're proposing to put this of course

[1:01:39] Planner: that's going to create damage to the banks because the banks are are like any streamside bank they're

[1:01:46] Planner: they're not, you know, they're susceptible to erosion

[1:01:50] Planner: as I stated in my report.

[1:01:52] Planner: So to answer the question about, sorry, I've drawn a blank.

[1:01:59] Planner: The second question was on.

[1:02:02] Trustee Maude: It was the previous bridge type structure

[1:02:06] Trustee Maude: that was just protected logs.

[1:02:08] Trustee Maude: Is that a permitted type thing?

[1:02:10] Planner: So there's no, so there's no, because it's uncertain

[1:02:14] Planner: certain this log structure was not there when this is the information I have when the current

[1:02:21] Planner: the applicants the owners bought the property it was it was there before by the previous owner

[1:02:26] Planner: although not I don't think it was there for the entire time I think it was taken out at some point

[1:02:33] Planner: again the applicants can may be able to provide background on that but if there's no for I think

[1:02:40] Planner: if you're searching for like a legal non-conforming or legality of it is once it's

[1:02:46] Planner: removed you have to comply with the regulation so it would be no different than this application

[1:02:54] Planner: so does that make sense does

[1:02:59] Voice 17: that answer your question trustee any more questions before i

[1:03:02] Voice 17: turn to trustee dons no okay thank you trustee dons i

[1:03:07] Voice 3: don't actually have any questions i did

[1:03:09] Voice 3: I did a site visit with Planner Chadwick last year,

[1:03:12] Voice 3: quite a thorough one with the applicants.

[1:03:15] Voice 3: And I've also done a site visit

[1:03:17] Voice 3: with the neighbor to the north.

[1:03:20] Voice 3: So I've also walked the property through there.

[1:03:22] Voice 3: So I have no questions because I actually know,

[1:03:25] Voice 3: I think I now know, understand the property quite well.

[1:03:27] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:03:28] Voice 3: Thanks.

[1:03:30] Voice 17: I have just want to make sure we're all clear.

[1:03:33] Voice 17: So my understanding is you've recommended

[1:03:37] Voice 17: that we should go no further on the development variance permit and thus if we decide to go in

[1:03:47] Voice 17: a different direction regarding the dvp then we'd have to go back and and do the considerations of

[1:03:52] Voice 17: the development permit

[1:03:53] Planner: that's

[1:03:55] Voice 17: that's correct yeah so there

[1:03:57] Planner: is still a development permit that's

[1:03:58] Planner: required if the trustees um ought

[1:04:01] Voice 17: to move ahead with

[1:04:02] Planner: the variance yeah and

[1:04:03] Voice 17: i understand your

[1:04:04] Voice 17: recommendation is based on your your and that's why you said you didn't do the work on the you

[1:04:10] Voice 17: haven't developed the dp because of your recommendation on the development that

[1:04:13] Planner: yeah

[1:04:15] Planner: the outstanding um consultation that we haven't heard back on and also um there's information that

[1:04:22] Planner: we feel is lacking in order to make an you know to finalize a dvp sorry dp

[1:04:27] Voice 17: okay and that's what

[1:04:29] Voice 17: That was my second question is, is the information related to what you call, you're referring to as the geotechnical information, is that related to the DBP or the DP?

[1:04:39] Planner: That would be to the, well, this is tricky because there's the intent of the setback from the natural boundary so that the intentions of that bylaw regulation are for the protection of sensitive or the ecosystem recognized as a water.

[1:04:57] Planner: So it has relevance to both, but it would be more specific to the potential damage to the sensitive ecosystem and what kind of conditions, again, if the LTC decided to proceed, what kind of conditions could be put in place to safeguard from those kind of situations.

[1:05:19] Planner: right

[1:05:20] Voice 17: and there would be there would be in the ocp as a check uh the development permit checklist

[1:05:27] Voice 17: that we'd have to go through

[1:05:28] Planner: yeah in this case i don't believe i don't believe we actually have

[1:05:33] Planner: one for main island robert may speak to my understanding is we don't because we don't

[1:05:37] Planner: have as many environment or sorry sensitive ecosystem dpas unlike say galliano or um but

[1:05:43] Planner: what staff would do is just essentially develop one based on the on the actual guidelines that

[1:05:49] Planner: that are in the OCP, as you say.

[1:05:52] Planner: And

[1:05:52] Voice 17: my last question is,

[1:05:53] Voice 17: can you tell me when the referral was made out

[1:05:56] Voice 17: to the various First Nations

[1:05:59] Voice 17: and how long they've had in terms of the referral?

[1:06:05] Planner: So that was, it's approximately two weeks ago.

[1:06:09] Planner: And typically we give them 30 days,

[1:06:12] Planner: but we did ask both the ARC branch

[1:06:15] Planner: and the First Nations, we did indicate to them

[1:06:21] Planner: that we would be considering this

[1:06:22] Planner: or the LTC would be considering this on today's date

[1:06:24] Planner: and if they could expedite it.

[1:06:27] Planner: But again, we haven't heard back, so.

[1:06:31] Planner: Sorry, Trustee Dodds, yeah.

[1:06:34] Voice 3: Just wanted to state that I did observe midden,

[1:06:38] Voice 3: certainly on the neighbor's property.

[1:06:39] Voice 3: There definitely is a midden there.

[1:06:42] Voice 3: Gives me great concern.

[1:06:43] Voice 3: So

[1:06:44] Planner: just for background, the stated potential in that registered ARC site, and there is, there's no, the archaeological site has been mapped and remapped, apparently in the early 70s, but the potential is for middens also, given its location, things like canoe anchors and other resources.

[1:07:14] Planner: My point about the mapping was that it may not be entirely accurate, and as I said, there is a high level of, or the mapping indicates high archaeological potential for the area where they want to put this walkway.

[1:07:28] Voice 17: Right. And there is no permit in place from the ARC branch at this point. Okay, thanks. I didn't see any reference, and I saw your point about the conversation.

[1:07:38] Voice 17: yeah

[1:07:38] Planner: and just to be clear that the the applicant has made the comment and he's and they're correct

[1:07:43] Planner: they what what typically happens is the arc if you if you do a data request and make

[1:07:48] Planner: indicate that you're going to be working outside of an archaeological site they will say you don't

[1:07:53] Planner: need one but they will also continue to say you know exercise an abundance of caution and if

[1:07:59] Planner: if there's a registered site in proximity that you should probably go ahead and or sorry

[1:08:07] Planner: Sorry, start with taking out a permit

[1:08:09] Planner: before you start your construction.

[1:08:11] Voice 17: That's the way I understood your report.

[1:08:13] Voice 17: I just wanted to be clear.

[1:08:14] Voice 17: I understood it.

[1:08:15] Voice 17: And given the, anyway, okay.

[1:08:18] Voice 17: Let me, before we can come back to discussion

[1:08:20] Voice 17: about this after we hear from the applicant.

[1:08:23] Voice 17: Mr. Allison, I'm assuming you're going to be speaking.

[1:08:26] Voice 17: And if you want to, you're welcome to turn your camera on.

[1:08:29] Voice 17: And I understand you may want to share some photographs

[1:08:34] Voice 17: and some material with us.

[1:08:36] Voice 17: and you're welcome to do that if you wish.

[1:08:39] Voice 17: I expect we can give you control

[1:08:41] Voice 17: or else we do have what you sent us late this morning,

[1:08:48] Voice 17: at least the trustees do.

[1:08:49] Voice 16: Yeah, we just wanted to make sure

[1:08:51] Voice 16: that you had that available

[1:08:54] Voice 16: in case we had any technical glitches today.

[1:08:58] Voice 17: Yeah, I think we're okay.

[1:08:59] Voice 17: I see it says you're now sharing your screen.

[1:09:02] Voice 17: So if we could, and as I indicated in my email to you,

[1:09:05] Voice 17: it would be appreciated if you could try

[1:09:07] Voice 17: and keep it to 10 minutes.

[1:09:09] Voice 16: Can I have 20 minutes like the planner?

[1:09:15] Voice 17: No, I'd ask you to

[1:09:16] Voice 16: keep it to 10 minutes if you can please.

[1:09:20] Voice 16: Okay, we seem to, there we go.

[1:09:26] Voice 16: Let's see if we can, so we have our first slide up

[1:09:29] Voice 16: and hopefully the magic of Zoom will work for us all.

[1:09:34] Voice 16: So thank you very much to the trustees and staff

[1:09:37] Voice 16: and as well as those from the public

[1:09:40] Voice 16: their concerns known we hope to show you as we go through this that although we understand that

[1:09:46] Voice 16: people who have raised oppositions have valid concerns and that those issues may be important

[1:09:51] Voice 16: to them we would like to show that we have looked at each and every concern and we believe they're

[1:09:57] Voice 16: fully addressed so I would given that the recommendation of staff is to not proceed

[1:10:05] Voice 16: although as I think you've heard from the planner there's still a lot of information they don't have

[1:10:10] Voice 16: and we know there's a lot of information that is needed for clarification and that referrals have

[1:10:16] Voice 16: not been received that today is not the day to move forward with that recommendation to stop

[1:10:22] Voice 16: this project so a little bit about me is I am a long time planning professional a quarter century

[1:10:30] Voice 16: or so and I've got a tremendous amount of experience working at well land use planning

[1:10:35] Voice 16: development, environment, climate action, and engineering, and I've done a tremendous amount

[1:10:41] Voice 16: of work within very sensitive marine areas and riparian areas, so I know the lie of the land

[1:10:47] Voice 16: pretty well, so I'm asking you to keep that in mind, that what's coming as information today

[1:10:54] Voice 16: is not conjecture. This is something that I can support fully from my experience, and it's your

[1:11:01] Voice 16: your job, I guess, to weigh what you've heard from your staff and opponents with what you're

[1:11:07] Voice 16: going to hear today. In any event, we do have a detailed briefing note that has a very detailed

[1:11:14] Voice 16: response to each concern that has been raised, each rationale provided by staff for not moving

[1:11:20] Voice 16: forward with the application, and we will have that available for you after this meeting for

[1:11:26] Voice 16: for your review.

[1:11:28] Voice 16: So in a nutshell, here we are.

[1:11:31] Voice 16: The gray structure you see is done to scale.

[1:11:35] Voice 16: The notorious log that many people have referred to

[1:11:38] Voice 16: that somehow got over the dam, which is in the lower right,

[1:11:42] Voice 16: that was picked up by the extreme high tides

[1:11:46] Voice 16: and storm activity last winter.

[1:11:51] Voice 16: Eulin, and this is our beachfront sitting area.

[1:11:55] Voice 16: It has been classified as a minor place, but as you can see, it's 80 feet of prime beach

[1:12:04] Voice 16: front.

[1:12:04] Voice 16: It's over 1,200 square feet.

[1:12:07] Voice 16: And you can see there, just in this image, are two sitting areas.

[1:12:12] Voice 16: So it cannot be characterized as a small insignificant asset.

[1:12:16] Voice 16: It is, of course, beach front property, and access to that beach front is extremely valuable.

[1:12:22] Voice 16: wall. I think you all know, especially our local trustees, that people have gone to extraordinary

[1:12:27] Voice 16: lengths to create docks and gangways to access tiny docks only for sitting when they don't even

[1:12:35] Voice 16: have a boat. There's numerous examples of massive staircases going down the shoreline. In fact,

[1:12:40] Voice 16: each property along Village Bay Front has access to the shoreline, which is rather surprising

[1:12:46] Voice 16: there would be such a coordinated opposition to providing what all of the opponents actually have for themselves at the moment.

[1:12:54] Voice 16: It's also important to note and keep this in mind throughout the presentation, the existing vegetation that is there that would pretty much completely obscure the proposed access to our property.

[1:13:06] Voice 16: And that's shown in the winter condition, which is the worst case when it's defoliated.

[1:13:16] Voice 16: Now before going further, I'd like to apologize for not having provided confirmation for the

[1:13:22] Voice 16: actual approach that we were using to implement this project. We had looked at a number to see

[1:13:28] Voice 16: which was the lowest impact, lowest cost, most feasible, but we can now commit to the proposed

[1:13:33] Voice 16: lightweight box tube structure. This is from a manufacturer over on the island. It's quite

[1:13:39] Voice 16: similar to almost all the gangways that you'll see up and down Village Bay at the moment.

[1:13:44] Voice 16: As a lightweight structure, it actually is only 600 pounds plus the wooden decking that you see, and you can see that the actual foundation for this structure is minimal.

[1:13:55] Voice 16: The big thing about this is that the normal two foot width that you need for a log, timber, or manufactured wood beam to support this crossing is no longer needed.

[1:14:06] Voice 16: So the maximum height of this is only 3 feet 10 inches.

[1:14:10] Voice 16: it's also an open frame structure which means it's mostly transparent and of course behind the

[1:14:16] Voice 16: vegetation that we showed you essentially will be very difficult to see even in winter time

[1:14:22] Voice 16: so we like to with due respect to the planning staff we have a different assessment of the facts

[1:14:32] Voice 16: in almost every case and we would like to put them forward to you now for your consideration

[1:14:38] Voice 16: and we'll return to these later.

[1:14:41] Voice 16: The first and foremost is that there is an approved

[1:14:44] Voice 16: and registered subdivision plan in place.

[1:14:49] Voice 16: By legislation, it must be reviewed

[1:14:52] Voice 16: and shown to be in the public interest,

[1:14:55] Voice 16: basic legal and planning principle.

[1:14:58] Voice 16: It was designed specifically to provide direct access

[1:15:01] Voice 16: to 539 Dalton's beachfront as it does

[1:15:04] Voice 16: for every other property along the beachfront, okay?

[1:15:09] Voice 16: As well, if you look at 535, they have a very narrow access, which we'll show you later, and that was designed in the subdivision plan.

[1:15:17] Voice 16: To come back later and say that there was no reasonable expectation to having access is stretching it a bit.

[1:15:26] Voice 16: The context, as we will show you in Village Bay, is in fact completely consistent with what we are proposing.

[1:15:32] Voice 16: It is absolutely not out of the ordinary, and it will actually provide visual interest.

[1:15:37] Voice 16: trust. It does, in fact, it's not a minor thing. It's not a nice to have. This was the reason we

[1:15:47] Voice 16: bought our property. Having that waterfront access was key. And as we'll show you later,

[1:15:52] Voice 16: the property values demonstrate it in no uncertain terms. So it actually provides

[1:15:59] Voice 16: an extraordinary and valuable benefit for the quiet enjoyment of our beachfront property.

[1:16:05] Voice 16: All reasonable background research and studies have been completed and provided.

[1:16:09] Voice 16: provided. I can tell you with an archaeological study, as Janine has said, yep, that's

[1:16:15] Voice 16: embitten and there might be some stuff in it. And that is important, but that's specifically

[1:16:22] Voice 16: why we are committing to leave that area natural, enhanced with a little vegetation, but the

[1:16:29] Voice 16: subsurface completely untouched. And that's a key point that was mentioned throughout

[1:16:34] Voice 16: our application, which has not been brought up to date, which is something you need to

[1:16:38] Voice 16: know and so that means that we will be preserving and protecting any artifacts that could potentially

[1:16:44] Voice 16: exist in perpetuity through our application we have looked at other access options and

[1:16:52] Voice 16: to be perfectly frank the suggestion that we should walk do a 200 meter detour through another

[1:17:02] Voice 16: property which is the Lidge Bay Community Park which has a long 200 meter path that is muddy

[1:17:08] Voice 16: and slippery throughout the rainy months as all locals know and then cross a body

[1:17:14] Voice 16: water course that we will show you is not easily passable most of the time is

[1:17:21] Voice 16: not realistic or practical further the two foot the ledge that the planner was

[1:17:27] Voice 16: mentioning is actually two feet high we're getting older and I've had some

[1:17:33] Voice 16: back and leg problems and we want to be able to access our property as we age

[1:17:38] Voice 16: A huge part of the reason that we're doing this project is that direct access through our

[1:17:44] Voice 16: property we can use the existing trail that goes through the property and enhance it so it is

[1:17:49] Voice 16: gentle grade non-slip surface that will allow us to have accessible access to our waterfront as we

[1:17:55] Voice 16: age. I put it to you that the need for development variant permits for lot line setbacks and riparian

[1:18:06] Voice 16: area is primarily a technicality and that is due to the irregular shape of the property

[1:18:13] Voice 16: that was granted in the subdivision plan for that specific purpose okay and further that the land

[1:18:22] Voice 16: use bylaw itself points to the riparian area guidelines which actually are fully laid out

[1:18:28] Voice 16: within the ocp and a note that the riparian area guidelines are to be addressed by the dp process

[1:18:34] Voice 16: We had discussed this many times with staff and they had committed to bringing them together because you can't really look at the development variance permit without the development permit and they have committed to bring them forward together.

[1:18:47] Voice 16: So you're lacking a considerable amount of information that would allow you to understand the project fully.

[1:18:51] Voice 16: In any event, given that the access has been granted in the subdivision plan, the variances would normally be considered to be a formality, particularly when they've been shown to do no major impact on surrounding properties.

[1:19:06] Voice 16: Speaking of which, the proposed structure is over 130 feet away and completely obscured in the summer and mostly obscured in winter from the only nearby residents.

[1:19:18] Voice 16: We have engaged the same QEP who did the riparian area study for the islands by law, who has actually done the mapping and knows the area intimately, and his report is categorical, okay, that the proposal has negligible environmental impacts and any potential impact is easily mitigated using a fairly straightforward set of recommendations.

[1:19:44] Voice 16: As I mentioned, by keeping the beachfront area in an undisturbed state in perpetuity, which we would commit to, the village-based shoreline and any heritage assets that could potentially exist, in fact, will be fully protected and preserved.

[1:20:01] Voice 16: And the project will provide significant habitat restoration enhancement, which is, in fact, the goal of the riparian area guidelines.

[1:20:10] Voice 16: lines. Without doing this project, it actually would be in its currently degraded state. As

[1:20:16] Voice 16: Janine knows, if you go down there, it's been deforested. The two trees that we have on our

[1:20:23] Voice 16: beachfront right now, someone's been going in over the years and chopping them down and keeping them

[1:20:27] Voice 16: trimmed so that their view is good. And there aren't any trees there. There's indigenous species

[1:20:33] Voice 16: there. And we want to restore that through this project. And I would like

[1:20:37] Voice 16: to point out, it's very

[1:20:39] Voice 16: very clear and with due respect to the opponents, Mr. Chair,

[1:20:44] Voice 16: it must be noted that only one property

[1:20:47] Voice 16: is materially affected by this proposal.

[1:20:50] Voice 16: And there's clear demonstration

[1:20:52] Voice 16: if you read through the letters of opposition

[1:20:54] Voice 16: that that opposition was orchestrated,

[1:20:58] Voice 16: coordinated and encouraged by the person

[1:21:00] Voice 16: who has most direct impact.

[1:21:02] Voice 16: So I encourage you to consider that in your deliberations.

[1:21:06] Voice 16: Okay,

[1:21:06] Voice 17: and I'm going to ask you to please move more quickly.

[1:21:09] Voice 17: You've been 11 minutes so far.

[1:21:10] Voice 17: Thank you.

[1:21:11] Voice 17: Okay, we'll move

[1:21:12] Voice 16: more quickly from now.

[1:21:13] Voice 16: All right, we want to acknowledge and recognize the context.

[1:21:16] Voice 16: It is a wonderful place.

[1:21:18] Voice 16: The picture on the left was probably why I bought my first house up the hill.

[1:21:21] Voice 16: It is a lovely place to sit.

[1:21:23] Voice 16: And if you see on the right, that is our location.

[1:21:26] Voice 16: It's a little piece of heaven.

[1:21:27] Voice 16: It's something that I think most people, even beach owners, would love to have.

[1:21:33] Voice 16: However, this is the reality of Village Bay.

[1:21:36] Voice 16: along with that lovely front.

[1:21:37] Voice 16: There are great massive structures going down to the water.

[1:21:41] Voice 16: There's a huge ferry terminal

[1:21:43] Voice 16: with parking for hundreds of cars.

[1:21:44] Voice 16: It's densely populated with a row of houses

[1:21:47] Voice 16: that goes for about two kilometers.

[1:21:49] Voice 16: And there's a row of existing gangways and docks

[1:21:53] Voice 16: that go down the bay.

[1:21:54] Voice 16: And that's because people want to be on the waterfront.

[1:21:58] Voice 16: So this is the actual context

[1:21:59] Voice 16: within which we're proposing to put our structure.

[1:22:02] Voice 16: Sure.

[1:22:04] Voice 16: So to make it clear to everyone,

[1:22:06] Voice 16: this is the geometry close up.

[1:22:09] Voice 16: As you can see, we have extensive waterfront exposure

[1:22:12] Voice 16: and a very large amount of beachfront exposure,

[1:22:15] Voice 16: which rivals most properties along the beach.

[1:22:18] Voice 16: And that's reflected in our property values.

[1:22:20] Voice 16: Below right, you see the subdivision plan

[1:22:22] Voice 16: that actually created that weird little corridor

[1:22:24] Voice 16: that gives us that access.

[1:22:29] Voice 16: My wife is an accountant

[1:22:31] Voice 16: and she loves looking at BC assessment data.

[1:22:33] Voice 16: So she took a close look at it, and it's very interesting things that come out of it.

[1:22:39] Voice 16: Probably the most important is that although our lot is much smaller, our land value is much higher.

[1:22:46] Voice 16: In fact, the value per square foot of our property, opposed to the one next door that does not have the beachfront access, is 80%.

[1:22:55] Voice 16: And we are, in fact, just above the average property value for a square foot of land of all the properties along the beach.

[1:23:04] Voice 16: And it's obvious to you why. It's waterfront property. It's extremely valuable.

[1:23:09] Voice 16: And you buy waterfront property because you want to use it, not because you want to go like through the park and then around the beach and over a creek when you can to get to it.

[1:23:21] Voice 16: This is, in fact, trustee mod. Here's that bad boy that went in.

[1:23:26] Voice 16: We put it in, as you can see, the seaweed towards the end of the summer.

[1:23:30] Voice 16: It was getting a little bit light, but we'd had a number of people, including ourselves, slip and fall.

[1:23:35] Voice 16: Trustee Dodds recalls and Ms. Chadwick remembered during their site visit, we almost had a big fall with Trustee Dodds trying to get across.

[1:23:43] Voice 16: cross. So we put this in as a temporary summer structure and we put it off to the side of the

[1:23:49] Voice 16: existing dam and avoided the foreshore grasses on what we thought was our property due to

[1:23:55] Voice 16: incorrect mapping and it turns out that the mapping for the island's trust is still wrong

[1:23:59] Voice 16: and this is still shown as our property. Once we noticed our mistake we did remove the structure

[1:24:05] Voice 16: and committed to go through a comprehensive process. There was quite a bit of opposition to

[1:24:10] Voice 16: this from people uh living down the beach and as you've heard and the planner summarized there are

[1:24:16] Voice 16: great concerns about easier access to the village bay beach for reasons of people partying leaving

[1:24:23] Voice 16: garbage crime criminals accessing not sure that's valid but there was quite a bit of opposition to

[1:24:29] Voice 16: this as well as concerns that this might interfere with seaweed operations uh this is the park next

[1:24:35] Voice 16: door as you see there's uh already crossings uh we believe possibly the one in the lower left

[1:24:40] Voice 16: there's one further down that actually is collapsing and that's what the local first

[1:24:44] Voice 16: nations were discussing with the parks commission recently and on the right that's another bad boy

[1:24:49] Voice 16: i put in after slipping and falling on the trail down the hill a few times i found a nice 2x12

[1:24:55] Voice 16: and put it across that so i wouldn't fall anymore here is what it actually looks like and it can

[1:25:03] Voice 16: hardly be characterized as a place that isn't really worth putting a lot of effort in to get to

[1:25:09] Voice 16: and it's why we bought our property.

[1:25:14] Voice 16: Here's a clear demonstration of how high the tides can get.

[1:25:17] Voice 16: And this is not a neat tide, sorry, a king tide,

[1:25:21] Voice 16: and there's no strong activity

[1:25:23] Voice 16: and it's already over the weir.

[1:25:25] Voice 16: In the actual creek,

[1:25:26] Voice 16: you would be standing up to about your chest.

[1:25:29] Voice 16: Okay, so it's simply not passable for much of the year.

[1:25:33] Voice 16: If you're wondering how I got there,

[1:25:35] Voice 16: I got my swimsuits on and I put my Tevas on

[1:25:38] Voice 16: and I waded across and I was shivering uncontrollably

[1:25:41] Voice 16: at that point. Here's an example when the tide is a bit lower, that in fact the creek has a strong

[1:25:48] Voice 16: current throughout much of the rainy season, which is from fall until spring. It's not an

[1:25:54] Voice 16: insignificant amount of time. You're almost finished, thank you. Okay, so here it is again.

[1:26:00] Voice 16: This is the actual context of the proposal. We have responded in detail to the First Nations.

[1:26:11] Voice 16: I'll spend a minute before I close up in this, focus in on this one.

[1:26:16] Voice 16: This was a mapping we were provided in late April by the planning staff.

[1:26:22] Voice 16: The red polygon is the actual polygon that we were sent by the archaeology branch.

[1:26:29] Voice 16: And of course, with my experience, we know very well that if you work near an area like that, you exercise care.

[1:26:35] Voice 16: if anything is found then you need to stop and get in touch with the archaeology branch and a

[1:26:41] Voice 16: qualified archaeologist we're quite completely aware of that but that's the foundation for our

[1:26:45] Voice 16: proposal which is to leave the area untouched um the yellow area is um i'd say considerable

[1:26:53] Voice 16: archaeological potential as we heard from the archaeology branch that red polygon was recorded

[1:27:00] Voice 16: in 1968 and quote, it is as you suggested,

[1:27:04] Voice 16: it might be a shell midden deposit

[1:27:05] Voice 16: with some associated stone arrows and canoe anchors.

[1:27:08] Voice 16: Those are very important to preserve if they exist

[1:27:11] Voice 16: and that is what our proposal does.

[1:27:15] Voice 16: We don't have time to go through each of our responses

[1:27:19] Voice 16: and I encourage the trustees to look at our response

[1:27:24] Voice 16: to each of these, but I will touch on a couple of these.

[1:27:29] Voice 16: Prohibiting use is not a good rationale

[1:27:31] Voice 16: for not allowing access to a prime waterfront property

[1:27:34] Voice 16: when it can be easily shown that it's low impact

[1:27:37] Voice 16: and easy to do, okay?

[1:27:39] Voice 16: So therefore, it's not disproportionate in any way

[1:27:41] Voice 16: to the actual value to the landowner.

[1:27:44] Voice 16: The variances are primarily a formality

[1:27:47] Voice 16: because they can't be addressed with this geometry.

[1:27:50] Voice 16: And the property is actually,

[1:27:52] Voice 16: this structure is 130 feet away from the nearest property.

[1:27:55] Voice 16: So it doesn't really challenge the bylaw provisions

[1:27:58] Voice 16: for the setbacks at all.

[1:27:59] Voice 16: we've talked about the opposition uh we understand the basis for it but we don't feel that the loss

[1:28:07] Voice 16: of use of our property is actually worth giving somebody protection of their view corridor in

[1:28:14] Voice 16: perpetuity that they don't really have an entitlement to i will touch on the geotechnical

[1:28:20] Voice 16: um it's been very stable uh we had trustee dodds and uh miss chadwick there trail that's been there

[1:28:28] Voice 16: for decades is perfectly stable. There is no sign of erosion. There is no sign of siltation.

[1:28:33] Voice 16: It's perfectly stable. We will commit, however, to engaging a civil engineer to ensure that the

[1:28:39] Voice 16: foundations are designed and constructed as per the recommendations in the environmental management

[1:28:44] Voice 16: report. And it is about three feet above the normal high water mark. And according to the

[1:28:52] Voice 16: the government of Canada, the worst case scenario

[1:28:56] Voice 16: is three feet over a hundred years,

[1:28:58] Voice 16: most likely about a foot.

[1:29:00] Voice 16: And if we do get beyond one foot,

[1:29:02] Voice 16: we'll have about three or four decades

[1:29:04] Voice 16: to react and raise the bridge foot.

[1:29:08] Voice 16: So these are the facts that we presented to you

[1:29:11] Voice 16: and we do have detailed information

[1:29:14] Voice 16: to back up each and every one of these facts.

[1:29:18] Voice 16: So as a result, we are clearly asking

[1:29:20] Voice 16: that you not approve staff's recommendation today and

[1:29:25] Voice 17: I understand

[1:29:26] Voice 17: that you'd like us to go ahead and and have them move forward to go to a

[1:29:30] Voice 17: development permit we

[1:29:32] Voice 16: would like staff to do what was originally agreed to

[1:29:36] Voice 16: which was to bring forward the combined development permit and development

[1:29:40] Voice 16: permit variance and we suggest to address the issues that are reasonably

[1:29:47] Voice 16: that have been brought up by staff and others

[1:29:51] Voice 16: that we apply these conditions.

[1:29:53] Voice 9: The

[1:29:54] Voice 16: first is requirements of the EMP,

[1:29:56] Voice 16: he originally-

[1:29:57] Voice 17: I'm going to stop you.

[1:29:58] Voice 17: We had this on-

[1:30:00] Voice 17: and I think all the trustees have read these.

[1:30:03] Voice 17: So we know you have an alternative development

[1:30:05] Voice 17: variance permit recommendation to move forward

[1:30:08] Voice 17: and a variety of things that incorporate the things you do.

[1:30:11] Voice 17: I'm just trying to be conscious of the time

[1:30:13] Voice 17: and I want to give the trustees time to ask any questions.

[1:30:17] Voice 17: Do you have a summary comment beyond this?

[1:30:20] Voice 17: Because that document we already had.

[1:30:22] Voice 16: I do not.

[1:30:23] Voice 16: This was our big finish is here's a way forward for you.

[1:30:28] Voice 17: Got it.

[1:30:31] Voice 17: So that's great.

[1:30:33] Voice 17: So I'm going to turn to first of all, the trustee,

[1:30:35] Voice 17: thank you for your submissions and to the trustee Dodds,

[1:30:37] Voice 17: if you have questions that you'd like to engage Mr. Allison.

[1:30:43] Voice 17: I

[1:30:44] Voice 16: will stop sharing my screen so you can see.

[1:30:46] Voice 16: Oh, you can leave

[1:30:47] Voice 16: that up if you like, whatever you like.

[1:30:48] Voice 16: Oh, okay, that's actually a good backdrop, sure.

[1:30:51] Voice 3: I don't have any questions.

[1:30:53] Voice 3: I've had a thorough examination of the actual site,

[1:30:56] Voice 3: the views from the site, all of the discussion.

[1:30:59] Voice 3: so I have no questions, thank you.

[1:31:01] Voice 17: Okay, Trustee Maude, do you have any questions?

[1:31:04] Trustee Maude: I don't have any specific questions,

[1:31:06] Trustee Maude: just maybe perhaps back to staff as to

[1:31:09] Trustee Maude: if there is an alternate road forward,

[1:31:12] Trustee Maude: if perhaps Senate APC or referring to the June meeting

[1:31:17] Trustee Maude: as the proponents requested,

[1:31:21] Trustee Maude: or are you sort of reached on sort of your recommendations?

[1:31:25] Trustee Maude: recommendations.

[1:31:27] Voice 17: So my question, and we'll turn to the staff in a moment. My question for you,

[1:31:33] Voice 17: Mr. Allison, is as I understand your presentation and I read all the materials you sent both on

[1:31:39] Voice 17: Friday and this morning, what you're basically saying is don't accept the planner's recommendations

[1:31:47] Voice 17: to stop, but rather refer it back to the planner for the continuation of the work on the

[1:31:55] Voice 17: the development permit uh that you will commit to the geotechnical issue and these other matters

[1:32:01] Voice 17: that are here and uh i i and i guess this isn't for you but i guess we're waiting i will have

[1:32:08] Voice 17: a discussion about what to do but that's your main point what's your your main point is that

[1:32:12] Voice 17: what

[1:32:12] Voice 16: i understand yes we believe that full information is required before the trustees

[1:32:18] Voice 16: can make an informed decision right we do believe that the conditions that we have laid out here

[1:32:23] Voice 16: fully address all of the concerns that have been raised regarding the proposal right

[1:32:29] Voice 17: yeah well i

[1:32:32] Voice 17: mean you'll you'll recognize that some of your point of view doesn't align with the point of

[1:32:39] Voice 17: view of the of the uh the neighbors who have objected but i think you've acknowledged that

[1:32:44] Voice 17: you just didn't come to an agreement with them we acknowledge

[1:32:48] Voice 16: your concerns and we understand

[1:32:50] Voice 16: to understand their interest.

[1:32:51] Voice 17: Right.

[1:32:53] Voice 17: And I'm curious is, yeah, okay, nevermind.

[1:32:58] Voice 17: I was curious about your comment

[1:33:00] Voice 17: about the view corridor, et cetera,

[1:33:04] Voice 17: that I guess you said they have no right to,

[1:33:08] Voice 17: I guess because it's looking out over your property.

[1:33:10] Voice 17: Is that what you're saying?

[1:33:12] Voice 16: Correct, tomorrow we could go out

[1:33:14] Voice 16: and to help the trust enhance the stream,

[1:33:18] Voice 16: We could go out and plant a long row of red cedars there if we wanted to, but I don't think that would make anyone very happy.

[1:33:24] Voice 16: So what we did, to make it really clear, there are two existing bigleaf maple trees at the far ends of the beachfront corridor.

[1:33:33] Voice 16: And because we need to take out the one to accommodate the bridge in the middle of the corridor, we need to plant four red cedars.

[1:33:40] Voice 16: and what we did although the QEP wanted to plant more trees in there we actually being aware of

[1:33:47] Voice 16: our neighbors concerns convinced them to put the two trees at the two ends of our corridor where

[1:33:53] Voice 16: there are already trees in other words the structure will be obscured and those replacement

[1:33:59] Voice 16: trees will actually be where there are existing trees okay I

[1:34:03] Voice 8: will request a fewer trees that's

[1:34:05] Voice 8: right the QEP wanted more trees okay

[1:34:07] Voice 17: so could I ask you perhaps if there's no question other

[1:34:09] Voice 17: other questions from the trustees,

[1:34:10] Voice 17: we can maybe get you to mute yourself

[1:34:12] Voice 17: and I'll turn to a planner test mail

[1:34:15] Voice 17: with the question from Trustee Maud.

[1:34:21] Planner: So my understanding is,

[1:34:23] Planner: are you addressing what's on the screen right now,

[1:34:26] Planner: Trustee Maud, that this alternative recommendation?

[1:34:33] Trustee Maude: Well, it was basically,

[1:34:35] Trustee Maude: is there an alternate road forward?

[1:34:37] Trustee Maude: Is it, you have a recommendation basically not to proceed.

[1:34:41] Trustee Maude: So

[1:34:42] Planner: yeah, so the assessment by staff, and it wasn't me alone, and I have to note that

[1:34:49] Planner: through the course of this application or prior to the application even, I think at least three

[1:34:58] Planner: planners have discussed this and basically indicated that this is problematic from

[1:35:05] Planner: from numerous points of view, which are in my report.

[1:35:09] Planner: So there is a road ahead.

[1:35:12] Planner: It's up to the trustees to decide.

[1:35:15] Planner: Just noting one thing though,

[1:35:17] Planner: that Mr. Allison and Ms. Casey's

[1:35:20] Planner: alternative DVP recommendation,

[1:35:22] Planner: you cannot approve a DVP with conditions.

[1:35:26] Planner: So what this is asking for,

[1:35:30] Planner: to list a bunch of conditions

[1:35:33] Planner: that you would approve the DDP today, you cannot do that.

[1:35:36] Planner: Robert may wanna weigh in on that one, but anyways.

[1:35:41] Planner: So if you're asking if we're rigid,

[1:35:44] Planner: basically we've presented a report with staff's opinion.

[1:35:48] Planner: It's not my opinion solely,

[1:35:49] Planner: it's something that's been analyzed,

[1:35:51] Planner: as I say, by planning staff together, so.

[1:35:55] Voice 17: Well, just to be clear, to ask your question,

[1:35:58] Voice 17: in a plan or testimonial, we can amend the development variance permit before we issue

[1:36:04] Voice 17: it, can't we?

[1:36:05] Planner: Yep.

[1:36:05] Planner: You could take out conditions.

[1:36:07] Planner: So you can approve it, but you can't, sorry, not conditions, they're actual variances.

[1:36:15] Planner: So you could say we approve this variance, but we don't approve the other one.

[1:36:19] Planner: But you can't put conditions into it, nor can you make the issuance conditional.

[1:36:24] Planner: and all my

[1:36:26] Voice 17: understanding always we could change conditions and correct me if i'm wrong and i'm

[1:36:30] Voice 17: glad to see robert rpm kajima here because i take all my education from or a lot of my education

[1:36:36] Voice 17: from him but uh my understanding is is we could we can change the provisions of a development

[1:36:44] Voice 17: variance permit as long as they're stricter but if they're less strict we have to

[1:36:53] Voice 17: re-advertise or something like that you're

[1:36:56] Planner: speaking about a tup now oh i'm talking about

[1:36:59] Voice 17: a tup okay

[1:37:00] Planner: yeah sorry but robert go ahead the

[1:37:01] Voice 14: same principle applies to a variance you know

[1:37:04] Voice 14: if there's multiple variances in a single permit you can um you know make it um you can make

[1:37:11] Voice 14: changes that would not require renotification and issue it you can make change you can amend

[1:37:15] Voice 14: the permit and re-notify um and there's other ways to if the ltc did wish to consider some of these

[1:37:23] Voice 14: conditions that couldn't be put in a in a dvp or even in the development permit because of

[1:37:29] Voice 14: its nature i mean the applicant could offer a section 219 covenant potentially um to ensure

[1:37:37] Voice 14: conditions that the ltc wanted to be met um so there are ways to you know achieve certain

[1:37:44] Voice 14: certain things if the LTC wanted to go that route.

[1:37:47] Voice 14: Trustee Mott also raised sending it to the APC for comment.

[1:37:50] Voice 14: Certainly you could do that.

[1:37:52] Voice 14: And again, we'd recommend the variance

[1:37:54] Voice 14: because it's more of a discretionary approval than the DP.

[1:37:57] Voice 14: The DP is focused on determining whether or not

[1:38:01] Voice 14: the proposal is consistent with the guidelines

[1:38:04] Voice 14: of that development permit area

[1:38:06] Voice 14: and incorporating the recommendations

[1:38:09] Voice 14: as conditions of the development permit.

[1:38:11] Voice 14: So

[1:38:12] Voice 17: I'm wrong. We can't put conditions in a variance permit. I'm thinking of a TUP. You're right.

[1:38:18] Voice 17: That's exactly what I was thinking of. And so this is a development variance because we have to either decide that the variance is granted or not granted.

[1:38:27] Voice 17: Or

[1:38:27] Planner: considered at a future meeting.

[1:38:29] Planner: Or

[1:38:30] Voice 17: considered at a future meeting.

[1:38:31] Planner: You could defer.

[1:38:34] Voice 17: Right. Okay, let's go back to Trustee, I think Trustee Dodds had, or Trustee Maude, do you have other questions you'd like to make of the planner? So, Trustee Dodds, do you have anything you'd like to ask further of the planner or just wish to enter into the discussion?

[1:38:52] Voice 17: I

[1:38:52] Voice 3: don't have a specific question, but I think we're talking about two different issues here.

[1:38:56] Voice 3: And the reality is, first off, you have to grant the variance before you can look at a development permit or the development variance permit.

[1:39:04] Voice 3: So you've got me confused now. I think we should talk about the variance.

[1:39:08] Voice 3: You can't do one without the other. And I thought we were talking about the variance.

[1:39:13] Voice 3: We

[1:39:13] Voice 17: are talking about the variance.

[1:39:14] Voice 17: okay

[1:39:14] Voice 3: so if we're going to

[1:39:16] Voice 17: go ahead i'm sorry i miss i i confused matters because i was getting

[1:39:20] Voice 17: confused between that and the tv okay so

[1:39:23] Voice 3: i think we should focus on the variance

[1:39:25] Voice 17: and decide make

[1:39:27] Voice 17: our a discussion and i think what i understood trustee maud to ask is

[1:39:31] Voice 9: if you

[1:39:32] Voice 17: didn't want to

[1:39:33] Voice 17: make a decision on the variance today could you send it back and see if there's conditions under

[1:39:37] Voice 17: which you would consider the variance i that's what i understood his question to be but i and

[1:39:42] Voice 17: And we had the answer from the RPM related to that.

[1:39:48] Voice 17: Anyway, I'm sorry to confuse over to you.

[1:39:53] Voice 17: Trustee McLaughlin.

[1:39:54] Voice 3: I think we should be discussing the motion

[1:39:58] Voice 3: that was presented by staff

[1:40:00] Voice 3: that have to find it again here.

[1:40:01] Voice 3: And I think we should be discussing that motion

[1:40:03] Voice 3: and deciding within that context.

[1:40:07] Voice 3: So I'm going to go ahead and move

[1:40:08] Voice 3: that the Main Island Local Trust Committee direct staff

[1:40:11] Voice 3: staff to proceed no further

[1:40:12] Voice 3: with the development variance permit application

[1:40:16] Voice 3: MADVP 2020.9, Alison Casey.

[1:40:22] Voice 17: Okay, that's been seconded.

[1:40:25] Voice 17: So that's on the floor for discussion, over to you.

[1:40:28] Voice 17: Well,

[1:40:29] Voice 3: I want to, I'm trying to find them.

[1:40:31] Voice 3: I don't have a paper agenda,

[1:40:33] Voice 3: so I have to scroll through my tablet here to find,

[1:40:35] Voice 3: but the rationale, I've done many, many variances.

[1:40:39] Voice 3: I've been around for many years

[1:40:40] Voice 3: and most all of the variances always touch on what is the impact on the neighbors is there an

[1:40:48] Voice 3: impact i've always been told that variances are about what affects the property around them and

[1:40:56] Voice 3: this particular property you know having visited both sites the fact is this does have an impact

[1:41:02] Voice 3: on the neighbor who doesn't own that little strip of foreshore it has visual impacts very much

[1:41:08] Voice 3: either from the house or from the yard that house the applicants bought has been there since i think

[1:41:14] Voice 3: the early 70s if not even longer and this was never an issue in the past people have owned

[1:41:20] Voice 3: that property with that small peninsula and it's a small peninsula which they have used for whatever

[1:41:26] Voice 3: purposes but it is just a piece of land and to put this humongous bridge across the creek so to be

[1:41:33] Voice 3: be able to go over there and then change the whole format of that area that those homes have all been

[1:41:38] Voice 3: there for quite a while i don't think it's acceptable and i think what was in the staff

[1:41:43] Voice 3: report and i was going to read it if i get it back on my tablet that vanished again so everything i

[1:41:49] Voice 3: think that that um planner testamale put in here is relevant to the discussion the absence of the

[1:41:55] Voice 3: structure to date has not made the use and enjoyment of the property prohibited people

[1:42:00] Voice 3: People have been living there for many, many years.

[1:42:02] Voice 3: The scale of the project is disproportionate.

[1:42:05] Voice 3: Like I had no idea that's huge, it's very large.

[1:42:09] Voice 3: The property was purchased knowing

[1:42:11] Voice 3: that there was not specific access over there at the time.

[1:42:15] Voice 3: The impacts on the neighbors is actually significant

[1:42:19] Voice 3: even neighbors who across the way, the light.

[1:42:25] Voice 3: So anyways, and this is not a place for the applicants

[1:42:28] Voice 3: to argue place for me to argue

[1:42:30] Voice 3: that I don't support the variance.

[1:42:32] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:42:38] Voice 17: Sorry, trustee Maude or you.

[1:42:42] Trustee Maude: Personally, I would be a little bit more comfortable

[1:42:44] Trustee Maude: sending it to the APC just to get a little bit more

[1:42:46] Trustee Maude: fulsome discussion, but if trustee Dodds is not supportive

[1:42:51] Trustee Maude: of that I'm prepared to support a motion.

[1:42:58] Voice 17: Okay, well, we have a motion and a seconder

[1:43:02] Voice 17: and the trustees have spoken.

[1:43:04] Voice 17: spoken. Generally speaking, if you're going to support his motion, then what I'm going to say

[1:43:10] Voice 17: is I don't know the area. I've actually seen it myself. I managed to get down there back in the

[1:43:17] Voice 17: summer. I went down and had a quick look at the area. It's a very odd configuration, but I

[1:43:24] Voice 17: will, in fact, take the view of the local trustees. I think that's an important

[1:43:32] Voice 17: and pointed to reflecting the community desires.

[1:43:36] Voice 17: So there's nothing further from either of the trustees.

[1:43:40] Voice 17: I'll call the vote.

[1:43:42] Voice 17: So all in favor of the motion as put on the table.

[1:43:45] Voice 17: So that passes.

[1:43:47] Voice 17: So thank you very much for your submission

[1:43:49] Voice 17: and your work, Mr. Allison.

[1:43:52] Voice 17: The motion has been moved and passed.

[1:43:55] Voice 16: All right, we'll look into other alternatives.

[1:43:57] Voice 16: Thank you.

[1:44:04] Voice 17: So the next item on the agenda

[1:44:06] Voice 17: Then is DPP 10.2.

[1:44:12] Voice 17: And do we have anybody from the, I'm sorry,

[1:44:16] Voice 17: Begrend, B-E-G-R-E-N-D.

[1:44:18] Voice 17: Do we know if the applicant is here?

[1:44:21] Planner: So, sorry, just to clarify, the applicant is now,

[1:44:25] Planner: I'm going to say it right, Markle.

[1:44:27] Planner: And they were Lloyd and I think it's Laura

[1:44:30] Planner: were planning to attend.

[1:44:33] Voice 17: I see a hand is up.

[1:44:35] Voice 17: oh now it's gone back down there it is laura and lloyd markle yes could we move the markles over

[1:44:41] Voice 17: and maybe move mr allison ms casey uh back to the attendee thanks yes

[1:44:47] Voice 4: just one moment uh i'm moving

[1:44:50] Voice 4: laura over laura lloyd um for some reason when i'm clicking mark and alice and they're not moving

[1:44:57] Voice 4: over might be a glitch over here oh there they are i think okay there we go you're all good

[1:45:03] Voice 17: no they're still on our screen oh

[1:45:07] Voice 4: i thought they didn't feel

[1:45:08] Voice 17: like the panelists list as well

[1:45:12] Voice 4: there

[1:45:15] Voice 17: they go there

[1:45:16] Voice 4: they go sorry about that there we go no

[1:45:18] Voice 17: you know sometimes there's just

[1:45:19] Voice 17: the delay in the way the technology works so so i'm sorry this is mr markle is it

[1:45:27] Voice 10: he's here yeah

[1:45:28] Voice 9: okay

[1:45:31] Voice 2: just had to step she's getting our daughter from school so it'll just see me

[1:45:36] Voice 17: that that's fine thank you very much uh so once again um what we have is we have a staff report

[1:45:41] Voice 17: that this matter starts at page 89 of the agenda package.

[1:45:48] Voice 17: We have a staff report that,

[1:45:51] Voice 17: and we'll have the planner indicate the staff report

[1:45:55] Voice 17: or put the staff report forward and then any questions.

[1:45:59] Voice 17: And then if there's anything you wish to say at that point,

[1:46:01] Voice 17: we'll, I'll turn to you and then we'll make a decision.

[1:46:05] Voice 17: So over

[1:46:05] Voice 10: to you, Planner Testa.

[1:46:12] Voice 10: Over to you, Phil.

[1:46:13] Voice 10: sorry

[1:46:13] Planner: sorry you froze there for a second oh

[1:46:16] Voice 17: did i i'm sorry

[1:46:17] Planner: that's okay uh so thank you uh chair

[1:46:21] Planner: jared rogers uh so m-a-d-v-p-20-20.12 which is big rand um now markle um is um for 511 r budas road

[1:46:34] Planner: um and the purpose of the report is to consider a development variance permit and the variances

[1:46:40] Planner: are for two existing accessory buildings on the property.

[1:46:44] Planner: The rationale for the variance is that granting it

[1:46:48] Planner: will retroactively permit the construction

[1:46:51] Planner: of two accessory buildings.

[1:46:52] Planner: One's a studio, the other is a shed,

[1:46:56] Planner: and it will also bring the property

[1:46:58] Planner: into compliance with the land use bylaw.

[1:47:00] Planner: So this particulars of the actual variance

[1:47:03] Planner: are to vary the rear and interior side yard setbacks.

[1:47:07] Planner: and for the accessory, and I'm referencing figure two,

[1:47:12] Planner: which is a site plan, which is on page 91 of the agenda.

[1:47:18] Planner: And for the first, for the accessory studio building,

[1:47:22] Planner: that's reducing the rear lot setback

[1:47:24] Planner: from eight meters to 5.3 meters

[1:47:27] Planner: and the interior side lot setback from three to 2.1.

[1:47:30] Planner: And then for the accessory shed,

[1:47:33] Planner: the rear lot setback would go from eight meters

[1:47:35] Planner: to 6.1 meters and then the interior side lot line would be from three meters to 0.49 meters

[1:47:44] Planner: the application was initiated by the previous owner who constructed the studio building

[1:47:51] Planner: using the fence line as a reference and the siting area was not revealed until a survey

[1:47:58] Planner: of the property neighboring property was conducted and the crd has confirmed that

[1:48:04] Planner: no building permit application was made for the studio building or its attached deck and ramp

[1:48:13] Planner: the shed which is under 10 square meters does not require a building permit so

[1:48:18] Planner: the staff requested a legal survey as well as a detailed site sorry floor plan of the studio

[1:48:26] Planner: to indicate the use of that building.

[1:48:28] Planner: The response was we did receive the legal survey

[1:48:34] Planner: and that the studio was used as a yoga art studio

[1:48:40] Planner: for his mother, unfortunately,

[1:48:43] Planner: or images on the real estate listing indicate

[1:48:48] Planner: that it was actually a bedroom with an en suite bathroom,

[1:48:52] Planner: which is not a permitted use in an accessory building.

[1:48:54] Planner: building. So the property had recently sold to the Markles and they were contacted by

[1:49:03] Planner: staff when they assumed the application in early April. They were made aware that the

[1:49:11] Planner: studio could not be used for human habitation and have agreed to that and also indicated

[1:49:16] Planner: that they had no intention to do so and that also it is no longer used in that way, i.e.

[1:49:21] Planner: the bed's been removed so um just to move to access or assessing the impacts on neighboring

[1:49:28] Planner: properties the most impacted neighbors by the proposed variances are to the south and north

[1:49:34] Planner: and the property to the rear is less impacted just because of the greater distances fencing

[1:49:41] Planner: and an existing vegetation in the southwest corner helped to screen the studio building

[1:49:47] Planner: and the studio is flat roofed and a single story and only encroaches by about a half meter to the south.

[1:49:55] Planner: So the ramp and the deck feature have minimal ground clearance.

[1:50:02] Planner: So as is shown in the pictures, which are part of attachment too.

[1:50:07] Planner: The impacts from the shed are also minor and the structure is relatively small and unobtrusive.

[1:50:12] Planner: is unobtrusive and if we're referencing the uh attached um attachment to the the property to the

[1:50:20] Planner: north is is open so there's no fencing and presumably the neighbors were fully aware of

[1:50:26] Planner: uh of the construction when it was undergoing when it was undertaken uh consultation so our dvp

[1:50:33] Planner: notices were circulated to surrounding property owners and residents and to date we have received

[1:50:41] Planner: one email in support of the of the variances uh the recommendation on page one is that the

[1:50:48] Planner: main island local trust committee approves issuance of the development variance permit

[1:50:51] Planner: uh ma dvp 2020.12 the grand and the reasons in support of that are that the rationale for the

[1:51:00] Planner: variance is reasonable uh the variances for the studio are minor and due to sighting areas and

[1:51:05] Planner: the impact on the neighboring properties are minimal the variances for the shed are minor

[1:51:09] Planner: and the structure is small and unobtrusive.

[1:51:12] Planner: The proposed variances do not challenge

[1:51:15] Planner: the intent of the regulation

[1:51:16] Planner: and neighbors have been notified

[1:51:18] Planner: and to date we have one letter of support.

[1:51:23] Planner: Sorry, there's alternatives on the staff report

[1:51:26] Planner: and that's my summary.

[1:51:29] Voice 17: Thank you very much.

[1:51:31] Voice 17: Questions?

[1:51:31] Voice 17: Yes, Trustee Dodd.

[1:51:32] Voice 3: I don't have questions.

[1:51:34] Voice 3: I actually got to visit before

[1:51:36] Voice 3: the Markels bought the property.

[1:51:37] Voice 3: So I've actually been on the property.

[1:51:39] Voice 3: I've seen the studio, know the layout

[1:51:41] Voice 3: out and I'm ready unless trustee Maude has questions I'm happy to move the motion trustee

[1:51:48] Voice 17: Maude do you have any questions and we can actually bypass Mr. Markle if you because

[1:51:52] Voice 17: the report is I think he'll be happy with that unless trustee Maude has I

[1:51:59] Trustee Maude: have no questions and

[1:52:00] Trustee Maude: if trustee Dodge wants to move I'll have the seconders yeah and

[1:52:05] Voice 3: I do want to say this since

[1:52:06] Voice 3: you know and if you look at what a variance is for which is to vary the rules and in the case

[1:52:12] Voice 3: like this one the amount being varied is very small and if you actually are at that particular

[1:52:17] Voice 3: piece of property it works out quite well some properties it wouldn't but this one the impact

[1:52:22] Voice 3: of the studio in particular doesn't impact the neighbor next door because the way of how their

[1:52:27] Voice 3: houses are laid out so i move that the main island local trust committee approve issuance of

[1:52:33] Voice 3: development variance permit application madvp 2020.12 per grand

[1:52:40] Voice 17: seconded any further discussion

[1:52:43] Voice 17: thank you for your thoughts trustee dongs okay uh and i'm fine with it too so all all in favor

[1:52:49] Voice 17: so that passes thank you very much uh plan is i'm sorry planner customer i'm sorry you didn't get to

[1:52:56] Voice 17: argue your case mr marco but uh you won anyway without arguing so thanks

[1:53:01] Planner: thanks trustees thank

[1:53:03] Voice 17: thank you very much for joining us uh and i think we're i think that's your last report

[1:53:09] Voice 17: planner testament so thank you very much for your work we'll see you when we see you on the next

[1:53:14] Planner: see on the next island yeah whenever

[1:53:17] Voice 17: probably on galliano or somewhere thank you rogers thank you

[1:53:22] Voice 17: take care later oh yes yes i was just going to suggest you want to take a break yeah so let's

[1:53:27] Voice 17: Let's take 10 minutes.

[1:53:30] Voice 17: We'll come back at five after three.

[1:53:33] Voice 17: Thank you very much.

[1:53:34] Voice 17: We'll

[1:53:35] Voice 10: just stand down for five, 10 minutes.

[1:53:36] Voice 10: Thank you.

[2:02:50] Voice 10: everybody's keen and back

[2:02:52] Voice 17: early so uh maple i see um deborah goldman and david brown here

[2:03:45] Voice 17: from the um main island housing society maple are you around i'm sorry yes you are uh could

[2:04:00] Voice 17: you maybe just uh move them and maybe i'll ask um deborah and david uh we'll just keep things

[2:04:06] Voice 17: moving but if you can move them over and just ask them to leave their cameras off for a moment

[2:04:10] Voice 17: sure

[2:04:12] Voice 4: and

[2:04:13] Voice 17: their microphones off so um welcome back um everyone uh we uh continue to enjoy

[2:04:25] Voice 17: the moving meeting in the traditional territories of the post-salish people um and i'm we're

[2:04:34] Voice 17: hopefully going to you know finish our meeting and everybody can get out and enjoy this beautiful day

[2:04:40] Voice 17: um we're at 10.3 of the uh uh of the agenda and i see that um planter chadwick is joining us

[2:04:50] Voice 17: planter chadwick and uh rpm kojima um i'm gonna if i could i just want to put a little context on

[2:04:58] Voice 17: this um the report and thank you for the report planter chadwick and i don't mean to take away

[2:05:05] Voice 17: from your report and you're welcome to to lay it out but i wanted to put a little context into

[2:05:11] Voice 17: this because of the uh amount of correspondence that we've received over the last 10 days

[2:05:17] Voice 17: i think in in in response to this report and i was thinking about this a little earlier and

[2:05:25] Voice 17: i remember the old expression i was growing up about no good deed uh goes on unpunished

[2:05:31] Voice 17: um after what i thought was a very good uh m cim on may the third i think it was i may have my

[2:05:42] Voice 17: dates mixed up um uh i had a court i had some conversation with the planner about what next

[2:05:49] Voice 17: steps and the planner was actually quite clear to me that you know it because of the the how close

[2:05:58] Voice 17: together that the CIM was in the meeting. Actually, it was April 26th, wasn't it? It was April 26th.

[2:06:04] Voice 17: And how close together there wouldn't be an analysis or a full staff report related to

[2:06:11] Voice 17: the outcome of the CIM or where we are going on next steps. And we talked about,

[2:06:17] Voice 17: well, are there some things that the local trust committee needs to talk about sort of generally

[2:06:24] Voice 17: generally that had arisen during the CIM um and and we sort of talked you know I'm trying to

[2:06:32] Voice 17: speak for myself but we sort of talked between us and said well you know one thing uh is referral

[2:06:40] Voice 17: to First Nations and we're very conscious of getting those referrals out early these days

[2:06:45] Voice 17: and another thing was the question had been asked and with there had been some discussion about

[2:06:50] Voice 17: you know what's what's the um uh amenity uh that we're going to be you know talking about and i

[2:06:59] Voice 17: said you know we probably should put our our mind to that at some point about what we think the

[2:07:04] Voice 17: amenity might be and on this on the rezoning like this because they're that that's what the ocp

[2:07:10] Voice 17: talks about is an amenity and uh you know the and then i said in the issue of that had come up

[2:07:16] Voice 17: during the cim related to um you know funding and what you know whether whether you know once we

[2:07:23] Voice 17: rezoned what happens if the project doesn't proceed and what kind of considerations because

[2:07:29] Voice 17: they said so maybe we should have a discussion about some of those things and see what the

[2:07:33] Voice 17: thinking of the of the trustees was around those various issues and and um for what for reasons

[2:07:41] Voice 17: reasons that are the communities their own that they particularly the last point was was uh

[2:07:47] Voice 17: interpreted as us having uh and having uh considering uh halting the rezoning or stopping

[2:07:56] Voice 17: the rezoning um until the funding comes in when there is no motion and there indeed that's that's

[2:08:05] Voice 17: that there's no uh suggestion of that yet uh it's just these were simply things i thought

[2:08:12] Voice 17: we were considering and i thought we could use this time um in our ltc discussion to sort of

[2:08:19] Voice 17: start that discussion rather than wait till june um and i i guess in my my mind i thought we were

[2:08:27] Voice 17: maybe trying to expedite some of that discussion and creating some time because i knew our agenda

[2:08:32] Voice 17: and may was not that busy or not as busy as other agendas can be and i obviously that that that

[2:08:40] Voice 17: has i won't say backfired but created a bit of concern and led to a lot of people expressing

[2:08:48] Voice 17: their view uh and we understand how that we should not do that now a number of those

[2:08:56] Voice 17: raise some very good points around whether we should or shouldn't do this but i just want to

[2:09:01] Voice 17: to be clear, do any of those things. But I just want to be clear that there is no specific proposal

[2:09:08] Voice 17: yet before us or even a suggestion or even an expressed desire yet by any of the trustees to

[2:09:18] Voice 17: do any of the things that are sort of identified in the staff report. They're just considerations.

[2:09:23] Voice 17: And we're going to get to those considerations at some point in the process. In any case,

[2:09:28] Voice 17: I just thought we might as well do it today or not.

[2:09:31] Voice 17: And it may be that trustees say, you know what, we're not ready to decide any of these

[2:09:36] Voice 17: things.

[2:09:36] Voice 17: So I just wanted to lay that context out and say, I'll take responsibility for creating

[2:09:47] Voice 17: this little bit of confusion, but I thought I was trying to create an opportunity for

[2:09:52] Voice 17: a little bit of advancement and a discussion.

[2:09:54] Voice 17: So I will think twice before I before I do that again in the absence of a fulsome staff report.

[2:10:02] Voice 17: It's always better to discuss these in the presence of a fulsome staff report.

[2:10:07] Voice 17: But I had my experience with Maine is people like to sort of get to the discussion in the heart of the matter quickly or early in the process.

[2:10:16] Voice 17: And I thought that was what I was intending to do. So having said all of that, I'm sorry to sort of take the stage,

[2:10:21] Voice 17: but I wanted everybody to be aware.

[2:10:23] Voice 17: I've invited the applicant to join us.

[2:10:27] Voice 17: I'll turn it to the planner,

[2:10:28] Voice 17: and I don't know if you want to add much to your report.

[2:10:32] Voice 17: I appreciate it.

[2:10:35] Voice 17: But maybe one thing you could do

[2:10:36] Voice 17: is sort of tell us what you think,

[2:10:38] Voice 17: where we're at in the process

[2:10:40] Voice 17: and where those next steps are as well.

[2:10:42] Voice 17: So over to you, Planner Chadwick, for a minute,

[2:10:44] Voice 17: and then I'll open the floor.

[2:10:47] Voice 18: Sure, yeah, thanks, Chair Rogers.

[2:10:49] Voice 18: Rogers, as you've sort of identified, the purpose of this memo was really to identify some key things that sort of needed a little bit more discussion from the trustees.

[2:11:01] Voice 18: And I mean, the only item on here is the referral that staff felt confident about actually providing any resolution language around was the referral to First Nations,

[2:11:13] Voice 18: because there's a whole lot of analysis that's needed with respect to that or or discuss I mean

[2:11:19] Voice 18: there's discussion but the other two points the discussion around confirming whether the LTC

[2:11:28] Voice 18: see the proposal as being consistent with the OCP that's consistently been on staff reports and

[2:11:33] Voice 18: hasn't really been sort of delved into just looking at the the OCP of entity provision

[2:11:39] Voice 18: vision and just sort of confirmation from from LTO as to where they're at in terms of that

[2:11:48] Voice 18: is something that needs to be kind of I think clarified and then yeah and then the other

[2:11:53] Voice 18: question around funding and the options around what options would be available with respect to

[2:12:02] Voice 18: you know possibly slowing the process down what have you so there's options there but again it's

[2:12:08] Voice 18: really out there for discussion. The other purpose of the memo was to identify where we are in the

[2:12:15] Voice 18: process. And the table one identifies that we've gotten everything we've asked for pretty much

[2:12:24] Voice 18: from the Housing Society. There's a couple outstanding processes we're working through

[2:12:29] Voice 18: right now. The housing agreement is with our lawyer and is currently being reviewed. In fact,

[2:12:34] Voice 18: I got an email this morning just confirming where that was at. And then we got to work on the

[2:12:44] Voice 18: covenant. So those are the two sort of larger items. And that's pretty much sort of what's

[2:12:52] Voice 18: contained in that memo. So I'll hand it back over to you, Chair Rogers.

[2:12:58] Voice 18: I

[2:12:58] Voice 17: know there's been, just by coincidence or happenstance, I happen to be working on some of the housing agreements slash with also with Galeano and Gabriel.

[2:13:13] Voice 17: Gabriel and and there's been some I don't I won't call it concern but some some views expressed about

[2:13:20] Voice 17: where we're at and how long we think it's going to take and whether they're because of some actions

[2:13:28] Voice 17: by the trust or or because we're trying to make them as consistent to whether we think we have

[2:13:33] Voice 17: any sense of what the timing might be on those um you said you heard from the lawyer this morning

[2:13:38] Voice 17: do we think that we might when we get to the third week of whatever the meeting in June is

[2:13:45] Voice 17: we might have some some of those things ready to present the LTC or wherever you think we're at

[2:13:51] Voice 17: so

[2:13:52] Voice 18: I'll say possibly I know that so the the in terms of sequence the main and the other

[2:14:01] Voice 18: housing agreement the Galliano housing agreement the main the two are being worked on by the same

[2:14:08] Voice 18: lawyer um and with the the main housing agreement being looked upon as um you know potentially

[2:14:15] Voice 18: informing parts of the uh of the galliano one so we are the main housing one is essentially

[2:14:21] Voice 18: on top of the pile at the moment um so um and we had we had discussions last week and i just had a

[2:14:31] Voice 18: yeah just a touch base this morning um so what i know is that that that they're they're in it and

[2:14:38] Voice 18: and they're on it and they were going to try and move it

[2:14:39] Voice 18: as fast as they could.

[2:14:41] Voice 18: So I don't have exact timing at this point,

[2:14:43] Voice 18: but I'm optimistic that we may see something.

[2:14:46] Voice 17: Okay, thank you, that's helpful to know

[2:14:50] Voice 17: that there's someone on it.

[2:14:53] Voice 17: Well, thank you, I've said what I wanted to say,

[2:14:57] Voice 17: I'm going to turn to the two trustees

[2:14:59] Voice 17: and see what your thoughts are related to the issues.

[2:15:02] Voice 17: Yeah, Trustee Martin, you got your hand up.

[2:15:04] Voice 17: I

[2:15:05] Trustee Maude: guess for a point of clarification, the Housing Society sort of presented us with a sort of digested legal opinion

[2:15:13] Trustee Maude: that we're not allowed to look at the viability financially of the project or anything beyond sort of the land use.

[2:15:23] Trustee Maude: And where I'm sort of getting a little bit confused here is if you go to page 109 of the agenda,

[2:15:28] Trustee Maude: where it talks about the the amenity zoning guidelines and 2102 the the first four bullets

[2:15:38] Trustee Maude: speaks of the provision of land for the preservation preserve blah blah blah blah

[2:15:42] Trustee Maude: when we get down to the bullet that we're dealing with bullet 11 for the provision of

[2:15:49] Trustee Maude: affordable and special needs housing it doesn't talk about land it talks about the amenity that

[2:15:56] Trustee Maude: that we're supposed to be giving

[2:15:57] Trustee Maude: is the actual physical housing, I believe.

[2:16:02] Trustee Maude: And given to me,

[2:16:06] Trustee Maude: that has to weigh into what the decision is going to be.

[2:16:11] Trustee Maude: And because we've been given

[2:16:13] Trustee Maude: sort of an alternate legal opinion,

[2:16:15] Trustee Maude: I'm really at this point saying,

[2:16:18] Trustee Maude: do we need to send this off to our lawyers

[2:16:21] Trustee Maude: to basically discuss what the amenity

[2:16:23] Trustee Maude: that we're supposed to be considering is?

[2:16:25] Trustee Maude: is so is it land is it the completion of the project what is it because i'm getting a little

[2:16:30] Trustee Maude: bit confused now as to to what exactly we're supposed to be talking about and approving

[2:16:36] Trustee Maude: because what what is the amenity that that we are receiving in return for this this generous

[2:16:42] Trustee Maude: um provision of giving land subdivided to the landowner thank you okay

[2:16:48] Voice 17: and that's a fair

[2:16:49] Voice 17: question i think that was the point of putting number two onto the agenda is what is the amenity

[2:16:55] Voice 17: that we see and how do we see it coming forward?

[2:16:58] Voice 17: Do either of the planners or the RPM want to discuss that?

[2:17:04] Voice 17: Yeah.

[2:17:05] Voice 17: Sure,

[2:17:05] Voice 14: I think Trustee Maud's correct

[2:17:07] Voice 14: in his reading of the OCP policies.

[2:17:10] Voice 14: It's pretty plain.

[2:17:12] Voice 14: It says the provision of affordable or specially housing

[2:17:15] Voice 14: or any other amenity is the final one that the LTC.

[2:17:20] Voice 14: Similar nature that's consistent with the OCP.

[2:17:23] Voice 14: So it gives some flexibility to the LTC

[2:17:25] Voice 14: see about what it considers the amenity to be um and the key question is is the provision of the

[2:17:32] Voice 14: addition of an additional lot excuse me additional lot um to the owner of the current property

[2:17:39] Voice 14: commensurate with and proportional to the proposed amenity because this is this situation is different

[2:17:45] Voice 14: from both the rezonings on galliano where the proponents have the land and they are um proposing

[2:17:53] Voice 14: proposing to rezone the land to allow affordable housing without a you know density bonus for

[2:18:00] Voice 14: somebody yet for the donor of the land or however they achieve that land acquired that land um and

[2:18:06] Voice 14: you know 20 plus years ago or 20 20 years ago plus or minus on Maine the land was rezoned behind the

[2:18:12] Voice 14: church for the seniors housing that never got built um but there was as far as I recall there

[2:18:17] Voice 14: was no density bonus involved in that it was just that piece of land was just proposed and rezoned

[2:18:23] Voice 14: and um so that's that's what makes this a bit different it's that density bonus that's going

[2:18:29] Voice 14: to the private landowner

[2:18:30] Voice 17: and and so and yeah i guess that would i guess you're right um

[2:18:38] Voice 17: xii gives us some flexibility to say and then this has been i think this was the question we

[2:18:44] Voice 17: were asked what's the amenity is it the the land at the end of the day or is it the project at the

[2:18:51] Voice 17: the end of the day i mean if we get right down to it which is and if it's enough for us to say

[2:18:57] Voice 17: you know the fact that there's now land that's rezoned and and available for for for free for a

[2:19:05] Voice 17: an affordable housing project or a project of some sort whether this particular project

[2:19:11] Voice 17: is built enough is that an amenity or is it the actual project itself so trustee dodds do you have

[2:19:16] Voice 17: something like that i

[2:19:18] Voice 3: just i think yeah i think we well first off i think we need to get clarification

[2:19:22] Voice 3: on a legal opinion on what is in our ocp because that was all done for the felix jack road

[2:19:29] Voice 3: subdivision so that was done a long time ago that language and so we should be really clear

[2:19:34] Voice 3: on exactly what the amenity is and then at the end of the day you know we we can decide if the

[2:19:41] Voice 3: the land is a sufficient amenity or whether we want to see the completion of a project but because

[2:19:47] Voice 3: we're in a bit of a catch-22 here with in order for the for the housing society to get the money

[2:19:53] Voice 3: they need to have be shovel ready and if they don't get money Mr. McHugh still has a lot that

[2:20:00] Voice 3: he can hang on to so I guess the sort of the big elephant in the room is how do we ensure at the

[2:20:07] Voice 3: the end of the day that what everyone thinks they're going to get an amenity and a separate

[2:20:12] Voice 3: lot are actually going to happen and also legally what is our terminology correct yeah rpm

[2:20:20] Voice 14: so yeah

[2:20:21] Voice 14: just in terms of the first question that trustee dodds is raising i mean there's mechanisms that

[2:20:26] Voice 14: can be put in place to ensure that the lots that lot to the middle lot is not developed until such

[2:20:33] Voice 14: such time as the housing is developed. So there's ways to ensure that that happens using

[2:20:39] Voice 14: mechanisms like covenants. So the zoning could go ahead, but the covenant could restrict the

[2:20:44] Voice 14: development until the LTC is satisfied that the actual proposal is going to go ahead.

[2:20:51] Voice 14: So if

[2:20:52] Voice 17: the proposal is the amenity, as opposed to the law.

[2:20:57] Voice 17: lot

[2:20:57] Voice 3: yes yes so so do we do we need a legal opinion for us to know whether just getting the lot is an

[2:21:06] Voice 3: amenity or if the whole project is a many or can we decide as a trust committee we're happy just

[2:21:11] Voice 3: to get the lot we're not really concerned about the project being built that would be a trust

[2:21:16] Voice 3: decision or do we get a legal opinion yeah

[2:21:20] Voice 14: i yeah i think if the ltc is satisfied that the land is

[2:21:24] Voice 14: enough i think that that 12 xii gives you that flexibility but if you're not if you have any

[2:21:32] Voice 14: concerns then if let me put it this way the ltc is is of the thinking that the land's enough um but

[2:21:39] Voice 14: you still have a bit of concern about whether or not it's consistent with the ocp then you could

[2:21:43] Voice 14: get a legal opinion at that point but at this point i think you're still debating about whether

[2:21:48] Voice 14: or not it's the land is enough to give the density bonus to the landowner or if you want somehow to

[2:21:55] Voice 14: see the actual project um at some stage before that lot could be developed right

[2:22:03] Voice 17: and then there's

[2:22:04] Voice 17: the other legal question that that was raised in the memo from the um uh from the housing society

[2:22:12] Voice 17: and I'll invite the Housing Society to join us in a moment,

[2:22:16] Voice 17: but from the Housing Society where they purported to say

[2:22:21] Voice 17: that from their view, we should not consider

[2:22:25] Voice 17: whether we think the project will ever get built up.

[2:22:30] Voice 17: I mean, I'm paraphrasing, but that there'd be sufficient,

[2:22:35] Voice 17: that they're going to be able to complete the project

[2:22:37] Voice 17: in deciding whether to rezone the land or not.

[2:22:39] Voice 17: and and you know my view would be that uh you know we can probably consider what we want but

[2:22:46] Voice 17: i wonder but they did express that as a as a legal view and that raised the question about whether

[2:22:52] Voice 17: we are somehow restricted from considering i'm not saying and please don't hear me to say that

[2:22:59] Voice 17: i have a particular interest i i tend to be of the view that um the funders should be the ones

[2:23:07] Voice 17: are concerned whether they can get this done but that that's just general yeah trustee doc

[2:23:11] Voice 17: we

[2:23:12] Voice 3: have a responsibility no matter what to have some indication you know of confidence in the

[2:23:20] Voice 3: project going forward before we go to a public hearing obviously we need like i'm still don't

[2:23:25] Voice 3: i didn't get a straight answer on approximate how much the project was and i'm still not clear on

[2:23:30] Voice 3: how the rents are so i need some kind of package that my public can actually read there's the

[2:23:35] Voice 3: the public out there you know you're not seeing them in the meetings but they're all not quite

[2:23:40] Voice 3: sure what the information so we need to know some better financial public information not the stuff

[2:23:45] Voice 3: that's confidential so that's one issue so we have a responsibility to have that information

[2:23:50] Voice 3: and to have a public form of that information that people understand now whether our decision

[2:23:56] Voice 3: should be made on whether or not we expect a final completion to be to be completed um i i don't i

[2:24:05] Voice 3: I don't think, I think if we have enough information

[2:24:08] Voice 3: that tells us what is planned, then we're safe to go ahead.

[2:24:12] Voice 3: But right now we still have a whole lot of gaps

[2:24:15] Voice 3: in that information.

[2:24:16] Voice 3: So first off, we need the legal opinion

[2:24:18] Voice 3: on what is the amenity.

[2:24:20] Voice 3: And it may be entirely that it's entirely up

[2:24:23] Voice 3: to the trust committee to decide what the amenity is.

[2:24:25] Voice 3: And then secondly, we need to have a better indication

[2:24:28] Voice 3: of what the financial plan is.

[2:24:30] Voice 3: And

[2:24:31] Voice 17: can I just ask the thinking around that? Because this issue has arisen elsewhere as to if we're not sure it's going to play a part in our decision making, why do we have a responsibility to ensure that the public information?

[2:24:53] Voice 17: Not so much on what the project would look like, i.e. I get why we need to know what the rents are going to be. Is it affordable? Is it actually a project that is going to be something that meets the needs of the community? I get that. We need to have that. I get that.

[2:25:15] Voice 17: that that's a that's a very real thing but why do we tell me why you think there needs to be a

[2:25:22] Voice 17: public disclosure of the actual financing of the of the uh of the project and where the money is

[2:25:29] Voice 17: coming from and how they're when

[2:25:30] Voice 3: you go to when you go to a public hearing and i've been to quite

[2:25:33] Voice 3: a few of them actually you know i think people are going to ask those questions and so here i am

[2:25:38] Voice 3: going to be making a decision i mean i with well we can't tell you that so but i'm going to make

[2:25:45] Voice 3: the decision having that information so you'll have to believe that I'm making my decision based

[2:25:50] Voice 3: on sound background that you don't that you the general public who's sitting in a public hearing

[2:25:56] Voice 3: is not getting that information and I'm not talking about hard cold numbers exact because

[2:26:02] Voice 3: nothing is going to be exact but I think people in general need to have a little bit more disclosure

[2:26:07] Voice 3: on and where the funds are coming from and what what the mortgage rates are going to be and all

[2:26:12] Voice 3: all that information that I got in an email that is confidential.

[2:26:16] Voice 3: So I'm not comfortable. I mean, I'm jumping way ahead,

[2:26:19] Voice 3: but I'm not going to a public hearing having to say, Oh, I can't tell you.

[2:26:22] Voice 3: I can't tell you. Well, that's,

[2:26:24] Voice 3: I think that puts the trustees in a really awkward position.

[2:26:26] Voice 3: So I think that for the public, they need simple, plain, you know,

[2:26:31] Voice 3: approximate facts of the project's overall costs,

[2:26:34] Voice 3: the expectations of where grants will come from and also what the,

[2:26:38] Voice 3: what the rents will be and the fact that people can own two homes sell them and apply for this

[2:26:44] Voice 3: housing which is what i heard in the information meeting i heard a couple of facts that were kind

[2:26:50] Voice 3: of surprising to me but that's how it works okay

[2:26:59] Voice 17: i i must admit i'm still struggling with how that's

[2:27:02] Voice 17: going to help me make a decision about the land use so um and and uh that well

[2:27:10] Voice 3: because the land

[2:27:11] Voice 3: use is for what people for affordable housing and so to know

[2:27:15] Voice 3: you know and some of us have a

[2:27:17] Voice 3: clearer picture of what affordable housing is which is not very affordable but but you know

[2:27:23] Voice 3: and others within the community have no idea and so I think we have an obligation to be sure that

[2:27:30] Voice 3: our public which is not always the public comes to meetings the majority are out there you know

[2:27:35] Voice 3: sharing information that's incorrect amongst themselves so we need to make sure people have

[2:27:39] Voice 3: correct information and certainly we shouldn't be making a decision without having some confidence

[2:27:45] Voice 3: that we have a large number of our community with the expectation that that the project's actually

[2:27:53] Voice 3: and you know the hope hope that the project will go ahead because i also don't want to be in a

[2:27:58] Voice 3: position of well what do i care about the funding you know here we're going to have a piece of land

[2:28:02] Voice 3: i've already done this twice you know but the church has got zoning for 16 eight duplexes we

[2:28:09] Voice 3: we have 10 senior friendly zonings on Naylor road. We, you know,

[2:28:13] Voice 3: it would be really nice this time to actually see a project that can go

[2:28:17] Voice 3: ahead. So I'm going to be part of a positive process,

[2:28:20] Voice 3: not being thrown back in five years saying, well, didn't you know,

[2:28:24] Voice 3: or how come you didn't tell us? So I want total disclosure.

[2:28:29] Voice 3: So it does matter.

[2:28:31] Voice 3: You can't just proceed with doing something without having the ducks in a

[2:28:35] Voice 3: row.

[2:28:39] Voice 17: okay um i mean that does take me back to the question from um miss dodie from the king from

[2:28:46] Voice 17: galliano and asked that question and that is the question question she asks you know we never ask

[2:28:52] Voice 17: private developers now they're different because well

[2:28:55] Voice 3: we don't have private i don't know where she

[2:28:58] Voice 3: lives but that's never happened on main island ever right right she

[2:29:03] Voice 17: lives on galliano anyway but

[2:29:06] Voice 17: But the question is that it is different

[2:29:09] Voice 17: when you're providing a return for an amenity.

[2:29:13] Voice 17: And every project is different.

[2:29:15] Voice 17: I mean, as R.P. Kojima said on Gabriola,

[2:29:21] Voice 17: they already owned the land.

[2:29:22] Voice 17: In Galliano, the land has been just donated

[2:29:27] Voice 17: without any condition, one project

[2:29:29] Voice 17: and the other piece of property is coming out

[2:29:31] Voice 17: of a public land that there's an agreement

[2:29:36] Voice 17: between two societies to transfer without any benefit in any case to anybody else so they're

[2:29:42] Voice 17: all different and this is a scenario where at the end of the day if the zoning goes through the

[2:29:47] Voice 17: subdivision happens there's a second property a second lot in addition and some more density

[2:29:52] Voice 17: created there in addition to the density here so do you mind that's a prestige mind or i i

[2:30:00] Voice 17: I did invite Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brown to join us.

[2:30:03] Voice 17: They're the applicants.

[2:30:05] Voice 17: Should we turn to them and just get their thoughts

[2:30:07] Voice 17: on this discussion of where we're at

[2:30:09] Voice 17: and then we'll come back and decide

[2:30:11] Voice 17: whether we want to ask staff or something.

[2:30:13] Voice 9: Okay, is that fair?

[2:30:16] Voice 17: Okay, so Ms. Goldman and Mr. Brown

[2:30:19] Voice 17: or whomever wishes just to speak.

[2:30:21] Voice 17: If you have anything you'd like to add,

[2:30:23] Voice 17: this is the sort of the discussion we're having.

[2:30:26] Voice 17: Welcome to turn, there's Mr. Brown, hi.

[2:30:29] Voice 15: Hi. I have a few prepared remarks here that may not address all of the issues that

[2:30:35] Voice 15: Trustee Dodds has brought forward, but I think they'll provide some clarity, at least in our

[2:30:40] Voice 15: thinking. First, thank you for having us here today. We apologize to you, the trustees and staff

[2:30:46] Voice 15: for any confusion regarding the discussion about the linking of funding to land use approvals.

[2:30:54] Voice 15: We didn't make clear to supporters that there's no pending motion at this time.

[2:30:58] Voice 15: Thanks also for the support from our partners on Galliano.

[2:31:03] Voice 15: So in the 10 months since Maine Island Housing Society applied to the Islands Trust for the rezoning of that donated parcel on Village Bay Road, a lot of work has been done.

[2:31:13] Voice 15: The Housing Society has responded to 10 requests for expert study and reports, and with relatively little guidance and precedent, the process has been incremental and slow and quite expensive.

[2:31:25] Voice 15: it the housing society is committed to pursuing this project and ensuring that it is financially

[2:31:31] Voice 15: viable to build and to operate we are capable and conscientious people acting in good faith

[2:31:37] Voice 15: the housing society has met every requirement put forward by staff in the ltc we're now at the stage

[2:31:43] Voice 15: in the ltc process where we would expect to move forward to first reading instead we're surprised

[2:31:48] Voice 15: by the discussion of a new and unprecedented requirement that would certainly delay and

[2:31:53] Voice 15: and probably kill the affordable housing project.

[2:31:58] Voice 15: I'll speak first to the consideration of amenities zoning

[2:32:01] Voice 15: and then to the discussion of possible linkage of approval

[2:32:03] Voice 15: to assured funding.

[2:32:07] Voice 15: The case for amenities zoning is,

[2:32:09] Voice 15: the LDC is required to consider the appropriateness

[2:32:12] Voice 15: of the proposed amenity as you're going to do today.

[2:32:15] Voice 15: And they're required to consider the implications

[2:32:18] Voice 15: for the parcel and adjoining parcels of land.

[2:32:21] Voice 15: The first amenity we believe is the housing.

[2:32:23] Voice 15: The project will be an enormous benefit to a community that is growing, while the stock of rental housing is shrinking.

[2:32:30] Voice 15: There is no purpose-built rental housing on this island.

[2:32:34] Voice 15: This project will not be the entire solution, but it will be the biggest step forward ever taken on this island.

[2:32:41] Voice 15: And the second amenity is the land.

[2:32:43] Voice 15: The Housing Society has agreed to remediate and restore the damaged wetland, not only on Lot 3, the Housing Society parcel, but also on Lot 2.

[2:32:54] Voice 15: it's a real shortcoming of the island's trust governance structure that the local trust

[2:32:59] Voice 15: committees have no influence over clearing and logging on private property we can see all the

[2:33:05] Voice 15: evidence of that as we travel around the island the proposed changes in the draft policy statement

[2:33:11] Voice 15: or the draft policy statement bylaw of april 27th may remedy this deficit eventually but that will

[2:33:19] Voice 15: be a long time from now if ever it should be noted that without the rezoning and subdivision

[2:33:24] Voice 15: the current or any future owner is perfectly free to log at will across the property

[2:33:29] Voice 15: much as has been done on the adjacent property to the west. This is a rare opportunity for the

[2:33:35] Voice 15: local trust committee to have remediated and to preserve in perpetuity a pocket of rare cedar

[2:33:41] Voice 15: wetland that will be an amenity forever. We believe the MIHS has demonstrated all the requirements

[2:33:47] Voice 15: in the amenities owning guidelines. The development is sited away from sensitive ecosystems

[2:33:52] Voice 15: systems as recommended by a professional ecologist.

[2:33:55] Voice 15: It is designed to minimize visual impact.

[2:33:58] Voice 15: The community will be nearly invisible

[2:34:00] Voice 15: from Village Bay Road or any neighboring dwellings.

[2:34:04] Voice 15: We've identified only one potential natural hazard,

[2:34:06] Voice 15: several wildlife trees to be managed

[2:34:09] Voice 15: according to the Argus report.

[2:34:12] Voice 15: We are committed to implement

[2:34:13] Voice 15: sustainable development practices

[2:34:15] Voice 15: and the development will not significantly

[2:34:17] Voice 15: or adversely affect adjacent properties,

[2:34:20] Voice 15: certainly less than most private residential developments.

[2:34:25] Voice 15: But I'd like to talk about the possibility of linkage

[2:34:28] Voice 15: of assured funding to approval.

[2:34:30] Voice 15: Why does it matter?

[2:34:32] Voice 15: This notion is unprecedented.

[2:34:34] Voice 15: It's impractical and it's risky.

[2:34:37] Voice 15: Linking approval to funding has never been done before,

[2:34:40] Voice 15: not on Maine Island, not on any Gulf Island,

[2:34:43] Voice 15: not in BC, not anywhere as far as we know.

[2:34:46] Voice 15: It's not been done for commercial rezoning

[2:34:49] Voice 15: like the Maine Island Resort.

[2:34:50] Voice 15: It has not been done for amenity rezoning

[2:34:52] Voice 15: like Felix Jack or Glen Echo.

[2:34:56] Voice 15: Our legal advice has indicated this notion is outside the jurisdiction of the LTC,

[2:35:01] Voice 15: a land use authority. If implemented, the linkage would establish an onerous precedent

[2:35:06] Voice 15: for other local trust groups pending in future applications. The linking of approval to funding

[2:35:15] Voice 15: is impractical. Land ownership is a requirement for pre-development funding. That is all the work

[2:35:21] Voice 15: needed to make a complete application. We've already done much of the earliest stages,

[2:35:25] Voice 15: changes, ecological assessment, preliminary design, septic feasibility, well drilling and

[2:35:30] Voice 15: testing, but there's more to do. Civil engineering, water system design, landscape, building

[2:35:36] Voice 15: architecture, and more. There are implications for all funding applications. BC Housing and others

[2:35:42] Voice 15: like CMHC, Vancity, the Community Works Fund, the Real Estate Board, all consider the state of

[2:35:48] Voice 15: project approval in their evaluations. Uncertainty is a risk, and risk reduces the chance of success.

[2:35:56] Voice 15: some of the most recent funding programs require shovel ready or nearly shovel ready projects the

[2:36:00] Voice 15: condition of funding this is obviously only possible when the design is well underway

[2:36:05] Voice 15: and approval and permits are in hand even if the time is straight for funding is less severe

[2:36:10] Voice 15: the more complete the approval the higher the score and the higher the likelihood of funding

[2:36:15] Voice 15: from any of these sources it was made clear by the representative from bc housing at the may

[2:36:21] Voice 15: 26th community meeting that land title regulatory approval and local support were key factors in the

[2:36:27] Voice 15: the evaluation of funding proposals. It is therefore unwise and frankly dangerous to require

[2:36:32] Voice 15: assured funding before approval. This condition, if imposed, will reduce the chance of success

[2:36:38] Voice 15: in a competitive funding environment. In particular, there's no point in the BCH funding

[2:36:44] Voice 15: process where funding is assured until the very end. In all the intervening stages, approval is

[2:36:50] Voice 15: incremental. As the design and operational agreements are refined, BC Housing continues

[2:36:56] Voice 15: continues to work with the provider, MIHS in this case, and as each stage is completed,

[2:37:02] Voice 15: risk is reduced, the design is more detailed, and the budget is more refined.

[2:37:07] Voice 15: At the very earliest stages, some progress can be made on the basis of preliminary approvals.

[2:37:12] Voice 15: Indeed, the Housing Society might have been able to get into the last round of BCH

[2:37:16] Voice 15: funding, the one that closed in January, had we had first reading. But without even first reading,

[2:37:22] Voice 15: meeting, we missed that opportunity. And finally, linking approval to funding is risky. It would be

[2:37:29] Voice 15: incredibly risky to the success of this project. It would create uncertainty for all the activities

[2:37:33] Voice 15: of the MAHS, including local fundraising. And to summarize the legal advice that we've received,

[2:37:40] Voice 15: one, in order for the project to get BC Housing funding, BCH requires as much project

[2:37:47] Voice 15: certainty as possible. This includes rezoning and subdivision. Two, making rezoning and subdivision

[2:37:55] Voice 15: approval contingent on proof of BC Housing funding would effectively deny the MIHS application

[2:38:01] Voice 15: because BC Housing won't fund the project without approvals in place. Three, making rezoning or

[2:38:07] Voice 15: subdivision approval contingent on proof of funding is also not authorized under the LTC's

[2:38:12] Voice 15: guiding documents. And four, adding proof of funding as an additional step on the application

[2:38:20] Voice 15: process may expose the LTC to liability or judicial review in this case and would set a

[2:38:27] Voice 15: bad precedent going forward for any rezoning or amendment processes in the future. So why would

[2:38:34] Voice 15: the LTC consider this unprecedented idea for fear of what? What is the worst case scenario?

[2:38:40] Voice 15: If this proposal is approved and if funding is delayed, there will be a lot, lot three, zoned for affordable housing with a drilled and proven well, owned by the Housing Society, a registered charity.

[2:38:53] Voice 15: There will be no substantial changes to landscape.

[2:38:56] Voice 15: There will be and there is a complete ecological assessment, including detailed mapping, a detailed wetland remediation plan, and arborist plan.

[2:39:06] Voice 15: land. There will be restrictive covenants allowing only the construction of affordable rental housing

[2:39:11] Voice 15: and providing protection of the balance of the property known as lot three. There will be a lot,

[2:39:16] Voice 15: lot two, that will be covenanted as well, prohibiting development and logging for over 80%

[2:39:22] Voice 15: of its area and restricted from having direct access from Village Bay Road. This worst case

[2:39:28] Voice 15: scenario is better than the status quo. So in conclusion, the case for amenity zoning has been

[2:39:35] Voice 15: made we believe. BC Housing is the primary funder for affordable housing in BC and their housing

[2:39:42] Voice 15: hub has just in the last month had a two billion dollar infusion in the form of a rotating line

[2:39:47] Voice 15: of credit. There's never been a better time to move forward with a project like this. Both the

[2:39:53] Voice 15: federal and provincial governments are actively supporting affordable housing at a level not seen

[2:39:58] Voice 15: for decades. The community supports this project. We've had over 100 letters of support in the last

[2:40:04] Voice 15: week and the actions of the LDC should reflect that local support. So what can the local trust

[2:40:11] Voice 15: committee do to maximize the opportunity for successful development? We ask that you act

[2:40:16] Voice 15: as quickly as reasonable with due diligence and due process. Unnecessary delay will increase both

[2:40:23] Voice 15: cost and risk. The viability of the project will be enhanced and the likelihood of successful

[2:40:28] Voice 15: funding increased if the property is rezoned, subdivision approved, and the project is as

[2:40:34] Voice 15: as near as possible to shovel ready

[2:40:36] Voice 15: at the time of application for funding.

[2:40:39] Voice 15: We respectfully request to schedule first reading

[2:40:42] Voice 15: and second reading for the next local trust committee meeting.

[2:40:45] Voice 15: Thank you.

[2:40:46] Voice 15: I

[2:40:54] Voice 17: see two hands up and I saw Trustee Dodds first.

[2:40:59] Voice 3: Yes, I have to make a clarification.

[2:41:01] Voice 3: The main inn was never a rezoning.

[2:41:03] Voice 3: The main inn was a down zoning.

[2:41:06] Voice 3: The main inn was never an amenity zoning.

[2:41:08] Voice 3: The main inn was a development permit application

[2:41:11] Voice 3: location and we were fortunate to reduce it by almost 50 percent density so this one by that it

[2:41:17] Voice 3: was never ever ever it actually was

[2:41:21] Voice 15: an amenity zoning yeah

[2:41:23] Voice 3: yeah but also was a down zoning we

[2:41:25] Voice 3: did not we did not zone the main there today so they already had the zoning to do substantial

[2:41:31] Voice 3: development and rose and i

[2:41:33] Voice 9: anyhow

[2:41:35] Voice 3: we did the right thing um and i just want to say that you know i

[2:41:38] Voice 3: I personally, I understand the funding needs to be,

[2:41:42] Voice 3: this has to be shovel ready.

[2:41:44] Voice 3: I completely understand that.

[2:41:45] Voice 3: And I'm looking for staff report that gives us mechanisms,

[2:41:49] Voice 3: if it's possible, mechanisms that provide some kind of safety net

[2:41:55] Voice 3: if for some unknown reason funding doesn't go ahead.

[2:41:58] Voice 3: We need to just have that all laid out in black and white in the staff report.

[2:42:02] Voice 3: but I certainly understand that anything tied

[2:42:06] Voice 3: to not actually giving clear title to the land

[2:42:10] Voice 3: with the zoning that you need

[2:42:11] Voice 3: would hinder your ability to apply for funding.

[2:42:14] Voice 3: I totally understand that.

[2:42:15] Voice 3: And this is a staff report and we're discussing it now.

[2:42:19] Voice 3: And I think that we're going to be hearing this short

[2:42:22] Voice 3: in the next trust meeting mechanisms to sort of help

[2:42:26] Voice 3: with the concerns.

[2:42:28] Voice 3: I still say the community needs to be able to,

[2:42:31] Voice 3: I need to be able to address the concerns that some community members have expressed by letter

[2:42:36] Voice 3: and by verbally about how the funding models work.

[2:42:41] Voice 3: And so we still have a little bit of unknown information out there

[2:42:44] Voice 3: that I would like to see a little more transparency in terms of financial interest.

[2:42:50] Voice 3: But there's no doubt that the project itself needs full support to get the funding.

[2:42:56] Voice 3: Thank you.

[2:42:58] Voice 17: Trustee Maude, you had your hand up.

[2:43:00] Trustee Maude: Yeah, I just, hammering home the legal opinion that I'm not allowed to consider the project is exactly why I want to get a legal opinion.

[2:43:15] Trustee Maude: Because my reading says the provisions of affordable and special needs housing is what the amenity zoning guidelines say.

[2:43:24] Trustee Maude: And it doesn't talk about the land.

[2:43:25] Trustee Maude: And so if the embedding zoning guidelines said the provision of land for affordable special needs housing, I'd be a little bit more clear in my mind and a little bit more clear as to the legal things that are being hammered home right now.

[2:43:41] Trustee Maude: But my reading is I disagree with that.

[2:43:44] Trustee Maude: I have to sort of be bound by the guidelines that are before me and the guidelines say that I have to consider the housing.

[2:43:52] Trustee Maude: and I just as much as you know I don't want to be in legal jeopardy because I didn't do it because

[2:44:00] Trustee Maude: I think I should and if we get a legal opinion that says to to me that no we don't need to

[2:44:07] Trustee Maude: consider the housing this is just about the land then yes I believe we we can we can move to a next

[2:44:13] Trustee Maude: step but I think we need to pause and get a legal opinion thank you I

[2:44:18] Voice 15: think we want to debating two

[2:44:20] Voice 15: slightly different points here that the as I understand the legal advice we had the issue

[2:44:25] Voice 15: would be the the linkage of either the final approval of rezoning or subdivision to the proof

[2:44:33] Voice 15: of assured funding it's logistically very challenging but it's also an unprecedented

[2:44:38] Voice 15: linkage so it it's less it's not so much related to the what considerations go into the decision

[2:44:47] Voice 15: around amenity zoning but more about the eventual and potential or discussed idea of linking final

[2:44:54] Voice 15: approval to yeah proof

[2:44:56] Voice 15: of assured funding and

[2:44:57] Voice 17: and and frankly i don't know if that's unprecedented

[2:45:00] Voice 17: um uh it i know that i've heard that that people have said it's unprecedented i mean remember what

[2:45:09] Voice 17: occurs is is presuming this matter moves forward and there are still some other issues for us to

[2:45:14] Voice 17: to deal with, like the covenant and the housing agreement

[2:45:20] Voice 17: and a public hearing where we're going to hear

[2:45:23] Voice 17: a lot of public comment and we're going to make decisions.

[2:45:26] Voice 17: But assuming we get the third reading,

[2:45:28] Voice 17: there is usually a long period of the law,

[2:45:31] Voice 17: a month-long period before we get to adoption of the bylaws,

[2:45:39] Voice 17: which is the end of our internal process.

[2:45:43] Voice 17: and then and then the subdivision application proceeds and you know the conditions that we

[2:45:51] Voice 17: set out related to the subdivision are put into place so what what i hear everybody what i hear

[2:45:57] Voice 17: the main island housing society look i totally understand i want to reiterate what christy

[2:46:02] Voice 17: dodd said i totally understand that your guys are saying to us we should not consider the funding

[2:46:09] Voice 17: um in in coming to a conclusion totally fair because it puts you in a scenario that it's that

[2:46:17] Voice 17: may be problematic for you i have another i have a whole another question about whether we cannot

[2:46:25] Voice 17: uh in the appropriate circumstance but that's the sort of thing we need some staff advice etc

[2:46:31] Voice 17: on that and the other issue as to what potentially the amenity might how broadly can we view the

[2:46:39] Voice 17: wording in relation to an amenity. But I totally get your point. And I've said this in my

[2:46:44] Voice 17: correspondence to Ms. Goldman. I think all the points you make about why we shouldn't do that

[2:46:50] Voice 17: are totally fair. You're trying to convince us not to do anything like that. And that's totally fair

[2:46:56] Voice 17: because you're trying to put yourself in the absolute best position. And the absolute best

[2:47:01] Voice 17: position is that you have a piece of land that you can take and say, we own this. And that's

[2:47:06] Voice 17: absolutely where you want to be and i we totally get that so um and that's fair enough i got it

[2:47:16] Voice 17: but it's another question as to what we can and can't do and i think you're hearing another

[2:47:22] Voice 17: message from trustee dodds at least from trustee dodds is um at least in her view she thinks the

[2:47:30] Voice 17: community would like to hear some more about how you how you're going to get this financially get

[2:47:36] Voice 17: this thing done so and i understand the um the sensitivity of that information um totally

[2:47:45] Voice 17: understand it um and but yeah i i i i just want to flag for you that there is and i'm not when i'm

[2:47:54] Voice 17: not telling you what you can and can't do i just want to make sure you're hearing that there's some

[2:48:00] Voice 17: since some desire for some of that information to be made more more public than it currently is

[2:48:08] Voice 17: and I don't know what the answer to that question is to be honest but I'm just letting you know that

[2:48:13] Voice 17: that could that issue is out there so

[2:48:17] Voice 15: that is fairly clear that that that information is desired

[2:48:23] Voice 15: but we haven't reached a conclusion at the board level

[2:48:28] Voice 15: or with our housing consultant

[2:48:30] Voice 15: about whether or not that's practical or useful.

[2:48:34] Voice 15: It certainly would provide a lot of fodder

[2:48:36] Voice 15: for discussion among naysayers.

[2:48:39] Voice 15: And I really don't want to debate a search

[2:48:41] Voice 15: all by cell

[2:48:42] Voice 15: with the whole community.

[2:48:44] Voice 17: And I get that.

[2:48:45] Voice 17: And I totally get that.

[2:48:47] Voice 17: I've had that discussion elsewhere

[2:48:49] Voice 17: that that's exactly what it becomes.

[2:48:51] Voice 17: comes um and uh and that and and someone say to me well if they want to know they can join the

[2:48:59] Voice 17: society and come to our board meetings i thought that was actually a reasonably

[2:49:05] Voice 17: good answer but um but but so i get i get your point i totally get uh miss golden you have your

[2:49:14] Voice 17: in the background. You need to unmute yourself though.

[2:49:26] Voice 3: Deborah, you're muted.

[2:49:30] Voice 7: I always think

[2:49:31] Voice 7: I unmute myself and then I haven't. I'm sorry. What comes across my mind when we're in this kind

[2:49:38] Voice 7: of a discussion is how much of this is related to the fact that we're a society, a non-profit

[2:49:44] Voice 7: society, and would you ask this of a private developer who is trying to make the same kind

[2:49:50] Voice 7: kind of an amenity development,

[2:49:53] Voice 7: would you ask that of a private developer?

[2:49:56] Voice 7: Would you want to know the proprietary information?

[2:49:59] Voice 7: How much do you need to know?

[2:50:00] Voice 7: And I wonder if, for instance, with Felix Jack,

[2:50:04] Voice 7: when the amenity was made for the community center,

[2:50:13] Voice 7: like was there a consideration of finances at that point?

[2:50:18] Voice 7: Are we being treated differently?

[2:50:19] Voice 7: We are understanding from our housing consultants that it's not a reasonable request that we are asked to provide this information.

[2:50:28] Voice 7: And so that's where we sit with that.

[2:50:30] Voice 7: And it creates a barrier for all this discussion.

[2:50:39] Voice 17: Yeah, Trustee Dutton.

[2:50:41] Voice 3: I happen to sit through the field.

[2:50:43] Voice 3: I was not a trustee at the time, but it's kind of like comparing apples to oranges, no comparison.

[2:50:48] Voice 3: In that case, it was a subdivision.

[2:50:49] Voice 3: it was quite easy to give up the parkland as part of the subdivision wouldn't have been approved so

[2:50:54] Voice 3: it's they're totally different scenarios but i understand your frustration but please don't

[2:50:59] Voice 3: compare it especially not the main in my god that is totally wrong incorrect information felix jack

[2:51:06] Voice 3: road there again the amenities were quite clear the land for the community center land for the

[2:51:11] Voice 3: park and within the subdivision there wasn't in terms of asking the developers well certainly

[2:51:16] Voice 3: everybody knew they were going to make money on the lots.

[2:51:18] Voice 3: Oh, they also built the road three minutes, but that, you know, that was,

[2:51:23] Voice 3: so you're asking me if a developer came to me today with a rezoning

[2:51:27] Voice 3: application. Yeah. I'd want all that detail. I think every,

[2:51:31] Voice 3: the more information you have, the better. I don't think in my opinion,

[2:51:35] Voice 3: a so-called private developer should be treated any different in terms of the

[2:51:39] Voice 3: information and all the covenants and stuff we've asked for.

[2:51:42] Voice 3: Those are our responsibilities.

[2:51:43] Voice 3: responsibility we

[2:51:44] Voice 7: don't have a problem with the covenants at all no

[2:51:48] Voice 17: and i don't think we're

[2:51:49] Voice 17: talking about that i think we i think we i think we are we seem to be out of eat them i think the

[2:51:55] Voice 17: the issue is the one that we've identified here today and i appreciate your conversation i was

[2:52:00] Voice 17: expressing to you in an email the difference the challenge we often have is the only time the three

[2:52:05] Voice 17: of us get to talk about that it's here with all of you with with everybody watching us talk about

[2:52:10] Voice 17: it so we don't talk about it other than that and so we i don't know what trustee dodds is thinking

[2:52:15] Voice 17: or trustee mod's thinking until we get here and um uh so i mean i i've been thinking about that

[2:52:22] Voice 17: analogy to a private developer um and and i guess what i would probably say to you is

[2:52:30] Voice 17: a private developer would probably not would probably be asked to

[2:52:38] Voice 17: contribute more than than this because this is a this is a um uh the the amenity here is the

[2:52:45] Voice 17: potential of a presumably a potential as brown said a potential of a housing development that

[2:52:51] Voice 17: is going to be a community man in and of itself um so you know and at some on some level it's

[2:53:01] Voice 17: It's the developer, what is, what you're, it's hard to compare because what the private developer has is what's left.

[2:53:10] Voice 17: They have what's left, right?

[2:53:12] Voice 17: As opposed to the actual amenity itself.

[2:53:15] Voice 17: But what we're talking about is the amenity itself.

[2:53:19] Voice 17: And so, in a sense, when someone comes along and says, look, I'll give you 40 acres if you let me develop these 20, we go, okay, is that a good trade-off?

[2:53:30] Voice 17: and then say okay we take our 40 acres we don't really care and then we don't then they why would

[2:53:36] Voice 17: the ltc care whether the other 20 acres get developed or not i mean we'll put conditions

[2:53:40] Voice 17: on whether they get on how they get developed but we we don't really care if it but here we're

[2:53:46] Voice 17: talking about the developments on the actual uh property that's being donated so that's why it's

[2:53:53] Voice 17: i think it's different but i but i hear all of your frustrations and i hear concerns and

[2:53:59] Voice 17: And this is frankly a useful discussion for me to hear.

[2:54:03] Voice 17: Yeah, Trustee Monk.

[2:54:06] Trustee Maude: Yeah, just briefly to ask the question

[2:54:08] Trustee Maude: before we get too far off topic

[2:54:10] Trustee Maude: is I was just listening on CBC this morning

[2:54:12] Trustee Maude: of the developer of the Northern Junk Property in Victoria.

[2:54:16] Trustee Maude: And they were required by the city council

[2:54:19] Trustee Maude: to employ a third party consultant

[2:54:22] Trustee Maude: to do a full business plan

[2:54:23] Trustee Maude: to prove the viability of the housing

[2:54:25] Trustee Maude: prior to going to public hearing.

[2:54:27] Trustee Maude: So to suggest that other jurisdictions

[2:54:30] Trustee Maude: don't require this.

[2:54:32] Trustee Maude: I just, I think we're off topic.

[2:54:34] Trustee Maude: We're scoring, we're straying all over the place.

[2:54:37] Trustee Maude: I want to get back to my original questions.

[2:54:39] Trustee Maude: Should we be sending this out for a legal opinion?

[2:54:46] Voice 10: Trustee Dodds.

[2:54:49] Voice 3: Yeah, so I think we've sort of beat everything

[2:54:51] Voice 3: around the bush and I do think that we understand.

[2:54:54] Voice 3: And so going back to the three recommendations,

[2:54:57] Voice 3: I mean, there's one motion, which is easy,

[2:54:59] Voice 3: the First Nations one, but I do think that it doesn't take

[2:55:02] Voice 3: us any time to get a legal opinion we should get a legal opinion on what the definition of the

[2:55:08] Voice 3: amenity is clarify for the trustees is that the land is that the project we need that legal opinion

[2:55:14] Voice 3: so i i move you know i can make the motion now and then i think that we need the third one

[2:55:19] Voice 3: i think we just the planner chadwick has heard enough conversation we just need some basic

[2:55:25] Voice 3: basic information on how we tie all this together so that we know at the end of the day that Mr.

[2:55:31] Voice 3: McHugh has a piece of property that's going to be worth a lot of money and how are we going to yes

[2:55:37] Voice 3: we could we'll end up with a housing land zone for housing whether it gets built today or not

[2:55:41] Voice 3: but we also have given away an amenity so if there is mechanisms out there that will give us some

[2:55:48] Voice 3: peace of mind then I think we need to know that so I can make the first two motions easily if

[2:55:53] Voice 3: if you're ready for that,

[2:55:54] Voice 3: or we could keep talking for a long time.

[2:55:57] Voice 17: Well, yeah, no, and I don't want to drag this out.

[2:56:02] Voice 17: I guess I'll just turn and you,

[2:56:04] Voice 17: why don't you make the first motion?

[2:56:06] Voice 17: Because I think that's pretty gone.

[2:56:07] Voice 3: It's actually in the materials.

[2:56:08] Voice 17: It's pretty much gone.

[2:56:10] Voice 3: Okay, I moved that the Maine Islands

[2:56:12] Voice 3: Local Trust Committee request staff

[2:56:15] Voice 3: to send the relevant application materials

[2:56:18] Voice 3: and related to MARZ 2020-2021.

[2:56:23] Voice 3: point one, Maine Island Housing Society

[2:56:25] Voice 3: to First Nations for early referral.

[2:56:28] Voice 3: That speeds it up.

[2:56:31] Voice 17: Okay, that's great.

[2:56:32] Voice 17: That's seconded.

[2:56:34] Voice 17: And do you have anything you wish to say to that?

[2:56:36] Voice 17: No.

[2:56:36] Voice 17: And I just want to say,

[2:56:38] Voice 17: one of the reasons we like to send them out

[2:56:40] Voice 17: for early referral,

[2:56:41] Voice 17: just so you're aware,

[2:56:42] Voice 17: is because that process carries on.

[2:56:44] Voice 17: And we like, and for First Nations,

[2:56:47] Voice 17: we often give other referral agencies 30 days.

[2:56:50] Voice 17: And that's just not realistic

[2:56:52] Voice 17: with a lot of the First Nations.

[2:56:55] Voice 17: the referrals to the other agencies

[2:56:58] Voice 17: will probably occur after first reading.

[2:57:02] Voice 17: That's pretty normal, right?

[2:57:03] Voice 17: I'm looking to the planners.

[2:57:05] Voice 17: That's pretty common as we get first reading.

[2:57:07] Voice 17: They go out the door and then we usually,

[2:57:10] Voice 17: it's normal for 30 days

[2:57:11] Voice 17: and we get a turnaround for the rest.

[2:57:14] Voice 17: Okay, so that's moved and seconded.

[2:57:16] Voice 17: Any further discussions, trustees?

[2:57:17] Voice 17: If not, I'll call the vote all in favor.

[2:57:19] Voice 17: So that passes you now.

[2:57:21] Voice 17: So,

[2:57:22] Voice 3: I'd like to make a motion on the second question, which is just to, I move that we request that staff seek legal clarification over the definition of amenity in the Main Island OCP.

[2:57:38] Voice 3: Is that, I want it to be broad.

[2:57:42] Voice 3: Is it too broad?

[2:57:44] Voice 14: Probably a little

[2:57:45] Voice 14: too broad, yeah.

[2:57:46] Voice 14: Okay.

[2:57:46] Voice 14: um i'm just thinking that the ltc might want to consider if it's premature to get a legal opinion

[2:57:52] Voice 14: at this point if we come back because i'm thinking about your next motion and if we come back and say

[2:57:58] Voice 14: here's a mechanism that will ensure that the density bonus does not occur in the absence of

[2:58:06] Voice 14: the housing the ltc being satisfied the housing's being provided then that seems pretty um um

[2:58:15] Voice 14: consistent with the OCP, it would only be if you're looking at land as the amenity.

[2:58:23] Voice 3: Okay. Okay. But that's where the conversation was. What do we consider? Is the land amenity

[2:58:30] Voice 3: or is the housing amenity? To me, both are an amenity. But I think as trustees, we need to

[2:58:35] Voice 3: come to an agreement on. So Trustee Maud, I'll throw it back to you.

[2:58:39] Voice 17: Well, I thought Trustee

[2:58:41] Voice 17: the mod wanted another opinion as to whether we're we're entitled to take into account the

[2:58:46] Voice 17: the funding or the financial viability of the project in in our consideration which was the

[2:58:55] Voice 17: point made by the main island housing supply um and

[2:58:59] Voice 14: rezoning is a discretionary approval on the

[2:59:01] Voice 14: part of the local trust committee so and if you're not comfortable with approving the application

[2:59:07] Voice 14: you don't have to proceed with it so yeah

[2:59:12] Voice 17: mr brown you wanted to i'll let you weigh in at

[2:59:14] Voice 17: this point even though just

[2:59:15] Voice 15: to be clear the the specific legal issue that we raised was the

[2:59:20] Voice 15: linkage of final approval to proof of funding okay not your abilities to consider amenity or

[2:59:28] Voice 15: rezoning that's certainly in your purview and you can take all the factors into that that you wish

[2:59:33] Voice 15: but the the judgment of the lawyer we consulted was that that final step of linking it to

[2:59:40] Voice 15: final approval of either rezoning or subdivision is unprecedented and so

[2:59:45] Voice 17: i i i i'll i'll just say

[2:59:48] Voice 17: um our parent kojima i heard enough about particularly from from i think from trustee

[2:59:55] Voice 17: mod but about some uncertainty about the scope

[2:59:58] Trustee Maude: hope.

[3:00:00] Voice 17: of uh amenities that it might be worth getting some clarification at this point regardless of

[3:00:05] Voice 17: what advice you give us around the second the third issue um that's sort of my thinking so

[3:00:11] Voice 17: i'm wondering if we could amend the and i should i haven't talked about today um but um i wonder

[3:00:18] Voice 17: if we could add to your motion trustee dodds and

[3:00:20] Voice 17: uh the ability of the ltc to link final approval

[3:00:30] Voice 17: to funding which is the point that i think that the well

[3:00:34] Voice 3: sorry i i think i'm trying to deal with

[3:00:36] Voice 3: number two so i think you should deal with

[3:00:39] Voice 17: okay okay let's

[3:00:40] Voice 3: deal with number two and number two

[3:00:42] Voice 3: to me and i'm throwing it back to trustee maude who had a concern about you know what is the

[3:00:48] Voice 3: amenity and i think we should be asking a clarification on what yeah so planner chadwick

[3:00:54] Voice 3: Yeah,

[3:00:56] Voice 18: I just had a question, because it seems to me that there's still a decision for the LTC to make, and that is whether they, how they define the amenity, because if they define the amenity as, I'm just going to bring it up again, sorry, as the provision of affordable and special lease housing,

[3:01:19] Voice 18: them and that's clearly defined if they're defining the the amenity as the provision of the

[3:01:24] Voice 18: the zoning to um allow for that then that falls into um you know xii which is where

[3:01:32] Voice 18: there may be some degree of interpretation so um i'm just i'm i'm i'm unclear on exactly what

[3:01:40] Voice 18: the legal opinion would be what what we'd be asking for that's

[3:01:45] Voice 14: why i was suggesting maybe

[3:01:46] Voice 14: Maybe it's premature, unless the

[3:01:48] Voice 14: LTC has said, yeah, we're comfortable with just the land being zoned as the amenity.

[3:02:01] Voice 3: So, so the trustees are you're asking the trustees to make a decision for number two that we need to make a decision as trustees without any legal information but trustee mod I think wants the legal so I mean I'm like to see us move forward on number

[3:02:20] Voice 3: and I don't think we have a consensus on number two.

[3:02:27] Voice 18: Yeah, I guess my question is,

[3:02:29] Voice 18: I'm still not clear on what the legal opinion is being,

[3:02:33] Voice 18: what the specific ask is on the legal.

[3:02:36] Voice 18: I

[3:02:36] Voice 17: think the specific ask is within the scope

[3:02:39] Voice 17: of the either the land or is the land enough,

[3:02:47] Voice 17: like a zoned piece of property sufficient

[3:02:50] Voice 17: to satisfy the OCP.

[3:02:52] Voice 17: is that all right trustee mod am i getting that right basically

[3:02:56] Trustee Maude: speaking yes it is because

[3:02:59] Trustee Maude: realistically the two different discussions are two different discussions is once about the land

[3:03:06] Trustee Maude: once about the housing um like as trustee dodds has pointed out we've already got two pieces of

[3:03:13] Trustee Maude: of property already rezoned for housing

[3:03:19] Trustee Maude: that never got executed.

[3:03:21] Trustee Maude: And if all we're doing is rezoning a piece of property

[3:03:26] Trustee Maude: without an outcome,

[3:03:28] Trustee Maude: is that you look what happened to the seniors housing.

[3:03:30] Trustee Maude: It's that was in the church property.

[3:03:33] Trustee Maude: The society basically wound up

[3:03:36] Trustee Maude: and the property balance is with another party.

[3:03:39] Trustee Maude: And the same thing could happen with this situation.

[3:03:42] Trustee Maude: and so like the way i'm reading it is i believe that the ocp speaks of housing as being the

[3:03:51] Trustee Maude: amenity we should be looking at and what i'm hearing from the proponents is that we're not

[3:03:58] Trustee Maude: allowed to do that so if the ocp is wrong then that's one thing um if legally we're wrong that's

[3:04:07] Trustee Maude: that's that's another thing because like i don't want to make a decision one way or the other

[3:04:11] Trustee Maude: based on something I don't know because I don't want to end up in court with somebody saying

[3:04:17] Trustee Maude: you should have considered the financing or some or equally saying if we did consider it that we

[3:04:23] Trustee Maude: shouldn't so so I'm really uncomfortable proceeding anywhere further until somebody

[3:04:29] Trustee Maude: with with who's a way lot smarter than I am can consider yes you're going down the right path

[3:04:35] Trustee Maude: because they're not well so

[3:04:39] Voice 3: i could go back to my original motion i think to resolve number two

[3:04:42] Voice 3: we need some kind of a legal review of our ocp that simply clarifies how we have laid it out

[3:04:51] Voice 3: and whether it's appropriate whether and i suspect that the opinion will be it can be land or housing

[3:04:57] Voice 3: i suspect that i think for for the peace of mind i think we need to be asking our lawyer just to

[3:05:04] Voice 3: give us some kind of clarification okay

[3:05:06] Voice 17: okay so let's make sure we have some wording for a motion

[3:05:09] Voice 17: so pat can you read back what you have for emotion is

[3:05:17] Voice 9: pat

[3:05:21] Voice 17: still around no

[3:05:22] Voice 3: they not no

[3:05:25] Voice 17: no she's not around she's

[3:05:29] Voice 3: trying to unmute oh there

[3:05:46] Voice 8: can you hear me now yes i can

[3:05:48] Voice 17: yeah oh

[3:05:51] Voice 8: my lord okay um so what i have down is the motion is that the local trust committee

[3:05:57] Voice 8: requests staff to acquire a legal opinion and clarification of the official community plan

[3:06:03] Voice 8: amenity definition be it land and or affordable housing that

[3:06:12] Voice 3: makes sense to me okay so that's

[3:06:15] Voice 17: your motion let me just check with the staff does that give you enough guidance to seek that

[3:06:22] Voice 17: that opinion yes okay so is there a seconder for that okay so that's been seconded uh any further

[3:06:31] Voice 17: discussion we've been around it if not i'll call the vote all in favor so we got that and then

[3:06:37] Voice 17: we'll get that back and we can make it and then we can perhaps make a decision on number two

[3:06:43] Voice 17: number three now um i yes trustee dodge you have an idea well

[3:06:49] Voice 3: i just i think what we're what we're

[3:06:51] Voice 3: We're wanting to know what mechanisms are in place that would give us what I would call a fail safe.

[3:07:02] Voice 3: So we need to know, for instance, if the zoning goes through, but then if the project doesn't go ahead, does Mr. McHugh still get a lot that he can sell?

[3:07:14] Voice 3: That would be one question.

[3:07:15] Voice 3: a long-term you know if the zoning goes through and the housing project goes through

[3:07:21] Voice 3: that's you know that's but but what if the housing project for some unknown reason so that's tying

[3:07:27] Voice 3: back to the zoning that didn't go through at the church hasn't gone through any other road

[3:07:32] Voice 3: is there some sort of provision we just need to know all of those things because our public is

[3:07:37] Voice 3: is asking them

[3:07:38] Voice 17: okay you want like to know what options are on the table for the lpc

[3:07:45] Voice 17: in the future i mean one of

[3:07:50] Voice 17: them is and i think you said this at our cim

[3:07:52] Voice 17: could always go back and rezone the property again but but i mean that's always an option but

[3:07:59] Voice 17: all of the various options that might be available um as a as a conditional i don't know what the

[3:08:07] Voice 17: right word is um it as a conditional uh recourse should the project not go ahead at some for some

[3:08:16] Voice 17: reason yes yeah that's right rpm power so

[3:08:20] Voice 14: something wrong

[3:08:21] Voice 17: rpm rpm you

[3:08:23] Voice 17: both got your

[3:08:24] Voice 17: your names

[3:08:25] Voice 14: both have k's yeah

[3:08:26] Voice 14: something along the lines of uh mechanism options on mechanisms to

[3:08:32] Voice 14: to ensure that the if that the amenity that the density is not provided without in the absence

[3:08:40] Voice 14: of the amenity something along those lines yeah

[3:08:43] Voice 17: and i'm not even i think options is the key because

[3:08:46] Voice 17: we may decide we don't need it right yeah

[3:08:49] Voice 3: so i move that we request staff to provide us with

[3:08:55] Voice 3: the options on mechanisms to ensure that the the project uh it's it's either it's the project now

[3:09:04] Voice 3: i missed the last words that the project proceeds um as as it was intended well it's more it's more

[3:09:12] Voice 3: on the line

[3:09:12] Voice 14: about linking the density

[3:09:14] Voice 3: increase to ensure yeah okay linking the density yeah

[3:09:18] Voice 9: did

[3:09:18] Voice 3: you get that pat okay so options that that link the to ensure that linking the density to

[3:09:29] Voice 3: the project is yeah

[3:09:31] Voice 18: that links the density to the uh amenities the amenity right

[3:09:40] Voice 17: okay

[3:09:43] Voice 17: so that that's the motion that's been made is there a second i think pat you've got that and

[3:09:49] Voice 17: And Trustee Maud seconds it.

[3:09:53] Voice 17: Yeah.

[3:09:59] Voice 17: Okay, so that's an option.

[3:10:04] Voice 17: We'll get a staff report.

[3:10:06] Voice 17: Any further discussion related to that motion?

[3:10:09] Voice 17: Okay, so yeah.

[3:10:14] Voice 17: And I just want to say the reality,

[3:10:18] Voice 17: at the end of the day, we haven't made any decisions.

[3:10:23] Voice 17: I hope the community is not hearing

[3:10:26] Voice 17: that we're going to link funding to anything.

[3:10:29] Voice 17: We're just looking at what the options are for us.

[3:10:34] Voice 17: And none of them may be palatable.

[3:10:38] Voice 17: All of them may be something that we don't want to do.

[3:10:43] Voice 17: Because for example, I get that if we put some conditions

[3:10:49] Voice 17: on the rezoning of lot two, that the owner of the lot

[3:10:52] Voice 17: may go, that doesn't work for me anymore.

[3:10:54] Voice 17: and that may cause concern.

[3:10:58] Voice 17: I'm sorry, Ms. Goldman, I'm going to have to get to you

[3:11:01] Voice 17: after we call the vote.

[3:11:03] Voice 17: So we're in the middle of a motion.

[3:11:07] Voice 17: So I'm going to call the vote all in favor.

[3:11:10] Voice 17: So that passes.

[3:11:12] Voice 17: So yes, Ms. Goldman, you wish to speak.

[3:11:14] Voice 7: Thank you.

[3:11:16] Voice 7: So the owner would like us to represent a question

[3:11:20] Voice 7: or a statement from him to the committee

[3:11:23] Voice 7: um uh that his intention with this land is as he had already always said that he doesn't want to

[3:11:31] Voice 7: sell it he has declared to us that he would like to that he's uh sorry he's when he dies it will

[3:11:39] Voice 7: be in his estate the the two properties that would result that he would have ownership of

[3:11:46] Voice 7: would be sold with the proceeds going to create a charity a charitable fund for

[3:11:57] Voice 7: the Ontario College of Art so if that informs anything sorry just one second let me finish my

[3:12:04] Voice 7: thought please if that if that is anything that can be useful for a covenant or something like

[3:12:11] Voice 7: that so

[3:12:12] Voice 17: this goldman i i'm just going to say two things relation to that um one is it would be far

[3:12:18] Voice 17: preferable if we got a direct statement from the property owner um we had this concern that that

[3:12:25] Voice 17: set everybody i think a little bit in confusion about the statement he made in august uh about

[3:12:33] Voice 17: not needing a second lot and and i i expect he made it uh in good faith at the time and i'm not

[3:12:40] Voice 17: not criticizing him. I'm just saying it. I think it's important that if he's, if there's going to

[3:12:45] Voice 17: be a commitment made by Mr. McHugh, or he wants to make a statement, or if you've prepared to

[3:12:50] Voice 17: include something into a covenant of that nature, et cetera, et cetera, that he make that directly

[3:12:56] Voice 17: to the trust rather than through you. Yeah. Trustee Dodds.

[3:13:01] Voice 3: Well, I just want to say that

[3:13:02] Voice 3: the reality is there's still another lot with another house. So we've increased density,

[3:13:08] Voice 3: city not by 10 but by 11 so whoever he sells the property to or whether the money goes to

[3:13:13] Voice 3: his children or to a charity is irrelevant to me zoning is linked to the land not the owner

[3:13:20] Voice 3: and so anybody can buy that property and fortunately with a lot too it would be protected

[3:13:26] Voice 3: in terms of covenant so that part i'll have confidence on but the fact of what he's going

[3:13:31] Voice 3: to do with that land in the future you know i understand you're the messenger but it really

[3:13:35] Voice 3: is of no benefit to the trust committee knowing that it's uh it's unfortunate he couldn't just

[3:13:41] Voice 3: have chosen to be leaving that land either you know to a community group or or to or just

[3:13:48] Voice 3: undeveloped undeveloped would have been perfect thank you so

[3:13:54] Voice 17: yeah and like so i appreciate the

[3:13:57] Voice 17: the different decision-making you're in as,

[3:14:00] Voice 17: and I hope nobody on Maine Island

[3:14:08] Voice 17: sees what we've, that motion's been passed today

[3:14:12] Voice 17: as a negative about the development.

[3:14:17] Voice 17: They're just matters we need more information on

[3:14:20] Voice 17: for our peace of mind.

[3:14:22] Voice 17: You've heard Trustee Maude talk about his concern

[3:14:24] Voice 17: about his reading of the OCP and wanting to make sure

[3:14:27] Voice 17: that he's doing the right thing and you've heard that trustee dodds um wants to make sure she's

[3:14:33] Voice 17: doing the right thing so the motions are not intended to create an impediment and in fact

[3:14:38] Voice 17: they're not even asking no we're not

[3:14:40] Voice 17: even asking you for anything at this stage we're just asking

[3:14:44] Voice 17: staff to report now if i could turn to planner chadwick um i know we've asked for a couple of

[3:14:49] Voice 17: things and i know we have the 219 covenant out there and i that's being worked on and i know we

[3:14:56] Voice 17: we have the housing agreement that's being worked on.

[3:15:01] Voice 17: We had a specific request from the Housing Society

[3:15:06] Voice 17: that we move to first reading in June.

[3:15:11] Voice 17: I don't know if you have any response to that question

[3:15:15] Voice 17: as to where you think we're at in the process in doing that.

[3:15:21] Voice 17: I don't know.

[3:15:22] Voice 17: I know we haven't passed a direction to you to do that,

[3:15:24] Voice 17: but I don't know what your thinking is or if you where you thought about that process that

[3:15:28] Voice 17: suggestion um

[3:15:31] Voice 18: well it is we do have draft bylaws the draft bylaws have already been

[3:15:39] Voice 18: um sort of put forward um and I guess it really depends on and they can certainly be

[3:15:48] Voice 18: be put forward again in in june um i think ultimately it'll be really up to the ltc

[3:15:56] Voice 18: whether they feel they'll have enough information um in the staff report and the questions that are

[3:16:02] Voice 18: being asked now um whether they'll they'll feel comfortable to move to first reading at that point

[3:16:09] Voice 17: yeah well i mean it's always up to the ltc as to whether we're giving something first reading i

[3:16:14] Voice 17: I was asking for your point of view as to whether you thought we were ready.

[3:16:18] Voice 17: And I guess my suggestion, and I'll be guided by my other two trustees,

[3:16:25] Voice 17: is why wouldn't we bring them back to the June board LTC meeting

[3:16:32] Voice 17: and that that be an option to give them...

[3:16:36] Voice 17: I don't hear anything that's going on about any major amendments to the bylaws.

[3:16:45] Voice 17: the draft bylaws and i mean that's not what our discussion is our discussions about sort of other

[3:16:50] Voice 17: i won't call them peripheral but other issues around related to the application but i don't

[3:16:56] Voice 17: hear anything that's like like like the last time we met when we asked them you to amend the the

[3:17:02] Voice 17: setbacks right to make them eight meters instead of three meters uh those sorts we're not actually

[3:17:07] Voice 17: addressing those and if the is there any particular reason the trustees think that we should not have

[3:17:12] Voice 17: them on our agenda with the with the possibility of giving them a reading or or do you do you just

[3:17:18] Voice 17: not want to do that until at this stage i i really turn to the trustees i i mean personally it's it

[3:17:25] Voice 17: to me first reading is a signal as much as anything um that we're still comfortable but

[3:17:31] Voice 17: if you're not i guess i i turn to you yeah

[3:17:35] Voice 18: and i guess from um you know um just to uh add that um

[3:17:42] Voice 18: they can certainly be brought back and, and there's, there's still,

[3:17:45] Voice 18: there would still be opportunity to make.

[3:17:48] Voice 18: Oh yeah.

[3:17:48] Voice 17: You can always amend them afterwards. Of course. Yeah.

[3:17:51] Voice 17: I don't know. I don't want the,

[3:17:53] Voice 17: the trustee Dodds or trustee Maude to feel like I'm pushing the process

[3:17:57] Voice 17: faster than you're ready. But I just, I just, it's just as I,

[3:18:01] Voice 17: we were asked the question, so I'm putting it on the table.

[3:18:05] Voice 3: I don't have any objections to coming in June,

[3:18:08] Voice 3: but I don't want to raise expectations because we've asked for a whole bunch

[3:18:12] Voice 3: bunch of information and we may we may have it by then we may be comfortable with it by then

[3:18:17] Voice 3: um but uh you know i think there's still questions that we're waiting for answers for

[3:18:23] Voice 3: so

[3:18:27] Voice 17: am i hearing that you'd be okay if they appeared in the staff report and uh with with

[3:18:34] Voice 17: effectively a non-committal uh option from the staff that said

[3:18:39] Voice 17: you can give a first reading if

[3:18:40] Voice 17: if you want to,

[3:18:41] Voice 9: something like that.

[3:18:45] Voice 17: Thanks.

[3:18:46] Voice 17: And if I could say this to Mr. Brown and Ms. Goldman,

[3:18:51] Voice 17: we absolutely will know you want us

[3:18:54] Voice 17: to give them first reading.

[3:18:55] Voice 17: We don't need a hundred letters to tell us that.

[3:18:57] Voice 17: We know that.

[3:19:00] Voice 17: I mean, we just know it.

[3:19:02] Voice 17: And I appreciate, you know, there's a fine balance

[3:19:06] Voice 17: between establishing community support,

[3:19:08] Voice 17: which this was an opportunity to do that

[3:19:12] Voice 17: and trusting our process,

[3:19:14] Voice 17: but impressing upon us the urgency of the situation.

[3:19:17] Voice 17: And we understand all of that.

[3:19:19] Voice 17: So, which is not to say, you know, people,

[3:19:22] Voice 17: I thought the comments that were made

[3:19:24] Voice 17: at the beginning of the meeting today were appropriate

[3:19:26] Voice 17: and they were thoughtful, so anyway.

[3:19:32] Voice 17: So is that enough direction,

[3:19:34] Voice 17: Flannery Chadwick for today on this issue?

[3:19:36] Voice 17: um so we'll do that you can put it in the package and and have a non-non-suggested uh that that's

[3:19:46] Voice 17: an option that or you could even say that the applicant has requested they be get given first

[3:19:51] Voice 17: reading and and that way it appears that that request has been made and that

[3:19:56] Voice 17: we can respond

[3:19:57] Voice 17: i mean that might be a way to do it um because you they did and they made a you know compelling

[3:20:03] Voice 17: compelling case so um anything else from either of the trustees regarding this issue nothing uh

[3:20:09] Voice 17: i'll give you last one one last word mr brown or miss goldman do you have anything further you'd

[3:20:13] Voice 10: like to say no thanks very

[3:20:19] Voice 15: much for your consideration um i i would just like to

[3:20:22] Voice 15: reiterate that our concern is not with the process of your adjudication over the amenities owning

[3:20:29] Voice 15: but the final that the final result should not be a linkage embodied in the final link to the

[3:20:36] Voice 15: final review final approval thank you

[3:20:39] Voice 17: yeah got it thank you and that point's been clear thank

[3:20:42] Voice 17: you very much mr frank so we're going to move on uh and thank you for your time and your attention

[3:20:47] Voice 17: to this um we now move to uh 10.4 which is a referral of of uh two bylaws from two draft

[3:20:57] Voice 17: bylaws from galliano which i am not going to take the time to explain the lengthy history of those

[3:21:06] Voice 3: so i i move that that the main and local trust committees uh interests are not affected by

[3:21:12] Voice 3: bylaw 256 and 257.

[3:21:16] Voice 17: seconded all in favor i will add that if yeah well there's a whole

[3:21:21] Voice 17: history around though you probably know the history you've got any trustee it's been around

[3:21:28] Voice 17: for a long long time and it's going to be around for a while it will make a large part of my

[3:21:34] Voice 17: Okay, so the next item of the agenda is the technical bylaws, 11.1, which is the OCP and LUB minor amendment project and staff report and a request for some direction.

[3:21:48] Voice 17: Byron Chadwick, do you need to address this?

[3:21:50] Voice 18: I can address it just very briefly.

[3:21:52] Voice 18: um so at the the last ltc um meeting the the ltc um moved to add the uh to add ocp and luv minor

[3:22:05] Voice 18: amendments to the um top priority list so in order to move forward um with this uh project i have the

[3:22:13] Voice 18: recommendation that the ltc requests staff to prepare a project charter um and i've listed

[3:22:19] Voice 18: there the amendments that have been identified to be considered um the first um the first three

[3:22:28] Voice 18: were um the result of letters that were received by the community so the removal rule of the parks

[3:22:35] Voice 18: master plan from the ocp um the agricultural society's interest in rezoning a property they

[3:22:43] Voice 18: recently acquired from settlement residential to community service changes in zoning for

[3:22:49] Voice 18: Felix Jack Park to prevent construction. There were three others that were added to the list

[3:22:58] Voice 18: as a result of conversations with trustees. One is the inclusion of First Nations Acknowledgement,

[3:23:07] Voice 18: which is something I think that's been on the table for a while. The restricted commercial use

[3:23:13] Voice 18: use um on at uh 594 fernhood road to indoor only which i understand was always to be the intention

[3:23:21] Voice 18: um and then number six is also addressing something that was already always um was

[3:23:28] Voice 18: always to be intended but uh but uh basically correcting a mistake with respect to properties

[3:23:35] Voice 18: that currently have a covenant on them to reduce the ability that basically they have a covenant

[3:23:50] Voice 18: to reduce further subdivision. And essentially this change would reduce the amount of the

[3:23:59] Voice 18: density, which was always the intention of the covenant. And that's identified

[3:24:03] Voice 18: in the subdivision um bylaw and the two no properties that this could apply to are

[3:24:10] Voice 18: identified um and yeah so so basically as i i identified um to in order to move forward i just

[3:24:19] Voice 18: staff need direction to to move to develop a project charter that's the

[3:24:25] Voice 17: mod i think i saw

[3:24:27] Voice 17: your name and just

[3:24:29] Trustee Maude: two things I would like to add or at least would like to ask consideration for

[3:24:35] Trustee Maude: adding one is if you recall from a year or so ago we had put on the list the definition of a patio

[3:24:44] Trustee Maude: and it's sort of been sitting in advance and I think it's something simple we can

[3:24:49] Trustee Maude: deal with and the other one was the issue of regulating election signs which is something

[3:24:57] Trustee Maude: from two years ago am

[3:25:07] Voice 17: i misremembering that we got a an opinion that we can't regulate election

[3:25:12] Voice 17: science am i wrong about that

[3:25:14] Trustee Maude: yes we we did get gary richardson got a legal opinion said that we

[3:25:17] Trustee Maude: could that's why we didn't deal with it at the time oh no we said we couldn't okay yeah so we

[3:25:24] Trustee Maude: thought we couldn't we got a legal opinion said we could and then it sort of got shuffled and

[3:25:30] Trustee Maude: things always seem to be getting back into election season again i just thought it's

[3:25:34] Trustee Maude: is something minor, but something that in the past

[3:25:37] Trustee Maude: we've been inundated with science.

[3:25:39] Trustee Maude: It seems really silly that the one thing that we give

[3:25:45] Trustee Maude: like unfettered discretion to is election science

[3:25:47] Trustee Maude: saying that they're totally unregulated.

[3:25:49] Trustee Maude: And I don't think that's right.

[3:25:51] Trustee Maude: Trustee Dodds,

[3:25:52] Voice 17: I saw your hand up.

[3:25:54] Voice 3: Oh, no, I just want to make the motion

[3:25:56] Voice 3: and I'll add the two that Dave has added

[3:26:01] Voice 3: because I don't think any of them

[3:26:04] Voice 3: and we're going to be any more onerous

[3:26:06] Voice 3: than all the other changes that we're proposing.

[3:26:09] Voice 17: Okay, so let's just, can you just,

[3:26:11] Voice 17: you'll just reference in your notes, Planner Chadwick,

[3:26:14] Voice 17: those two extra things in the list?

[3:26:16] Voice 17: Okay, then let's have the motion.

[3:26:19] Voice 3: Okay, so I'm going to move that the Main Island

[3:26:20] Voice 3: Local Trust Committee request staff to prepare

[3:26:22] Voice 3: a project charter for the OCP and LUB minor amendment

[3:26:26] Voice 3: project to include the amendments identified

[3:26:28] Voice 3: in the May chance 2021 staff report,

[3:26:31] Voice 3: in addition, a consideration on election sign controls

[3:26:36] Voice 3: and definitions of patios.

[3:26:41] Voice 17: Okay, Pat, did you get those additions?

[3:26:46] Voice 3: The election signs and patios.

[3:26:48] Voice 17: Is she nodding?

[3:26:49] Voice 17: Yes, she got it.

[3:26:52] Voice 17: Yes.

[3:26:53] Voice 17: Okay, is there a seconder?

[3:26:55] Voice 17: Okay, I'll call the vote.

[3:26:57] Voice 17: All in favor?

[3:26:58] Voice 17: That passes.

[3:26:59] Voice 17: Thanks very much.

[3:27:00] Voice 17: Okay. We have a 12.1 as our work program report. Any changes to that from either of you?

[3:27:13] Voice 17: No. I assume we'll get back to some of these matters as we go along. There's only one,

[3:27:21] Voice 17: anything on the projects report. There's a trustee expense. Oh no, we have an applications

[3:27:27] Voice 17: Is there any questions related to the applications report?

[3:27:31] Voice 17: Yes, Trustee Dodds.

[3:27:35] Voice 17: You're muted, Janine.

[3:27:40] Voice 3: I didn't add this, but the Ag Society now owns,

[3:27:43] Voice 3: well, they will at the end of May,

[3:27:45] Voice 3: they will own the trailer that they bought, the mobile,

[3:27:48] Voice 3: and they are okay with going ahead

[3:27:51] Voice 3: and just doing renovations,

[3:27:52] Voice 3: but they would actually like to open it as a thrift shop

[3:27:56] Voice 3: under their TUP.

[3:27:57] Voice 3: And because we have all these other applications,

[3:27:59] Voice 3: So I'm wanting us to move them up on the list of priorities ahead of some of the other applications.

[3:28:07] Voice 3: So what's the mechanism to do that?

[3:28:11] Voice 14: If the LTC is in agreement, then we'll just take your direction, my consensus.

[3:28:17] Voice 14: But if you want to have

[3:28:18] Voice 3: some sort of debate

[3:28:19] Voice 14: about it, then a resolution.

[3:28:20] Voice 14: I

[3:28:21] Voice 3: can give you a picture of the egg hole, but they really want to get the egg hole back to being the egg hole because right now it's the thrift shop.

[3:28:28] Voice 9: so

[3:28:28] Voice 3: they're anxious to be able to use the new property as soon as they can certainly by july

[3:28:34] Voice 3: 1st so yes please put it at the top of the agenda and

[3:28:38] Voice 17: i'm seeing nods from trustee mod and i'm fine

[3:28:41] Voice 17: with that so so if you just take that uh direction that thank you thanks okay uh anything else

[3:28:48] Voice 17: related to the applications i'm seeing nothing we have our trustee local election a local expense

[3:28:54] Voice 17: expense report, which of course shows very little.

[3:28:57] Voice 17: We have our adoptive policy standards resolution,

[3:29:00] Voice 17: and now we're at the chair's report, the local,

[3:29:04] Voice 17: and I had a bunch of things I wanted to report,

[3:29:07] Voice 17: but because of the length of the meeting,

[3:29:10] Voice 17: but I'll just say this,

[3:29:12] Voice 17: if you haven't seen it,

[3:29:14] Voice 17: and obviously the housing society had the first draft

[3:29:17] Voice 17: of the trust programs,

[3:29:18] Voice 17: the trust policy statement is out for review.

[3:29:23] Voice 17: It's now being reviewed by the Trust Programs Committee

[3:29:30] Voice 17: and I think it's going to the Regional Planning Committee

[3:29:32] Voice 17: on Wednesday for input and review.

[3:29:36] Voice 17: And the plan is to have, this is for the trustees,

[3:29:40] Voice 17: the plan right now is to have a special one day session

[3:29:43] Voice 17: in the, I think it's July 8th or something like that

[3:29:48] Voice 17: to deal with that, take it out of the Trust Council

[3:29:51] Voice 17: because it was so onerous in March to try and consider that in the course of the Trust Council.

[3:30:00] Voice 17: day session to review it and give it first reading. It's in the form of a draft bylaw.

[3:30:05] Voice 17: You'll have lots of opportunity to give your input and of course then it'll go out for public comment

[3:30:10] Voice 17: and engagement. The other thing I wanted to point out was that I believe as of today the

[3:30:21] Voice 17: governance review contract has been made public and is out there and I believe at the meeting

[3:30:29] Voice 17: today the there was they they met with the contractor uh related to the work that's being

[3:30:34] Voice 17: done so that work is is ongoing um as we speak um and there's a lot else going on and i will

[3:30:45] Voice 17: i'll just leave it at that because i honestly had some other things and i think of them when

[3:30:49] Voice 17: the trustees are speaking i'll come back but otherwise who'd like to go first on the trustees

[3:30:52] Voice 17: report trustee dots how about you got any report i

[3:30:56] Voice 3: don't really have anything to report other than

[3:30:59] Voice 3: And, you know, with the recent, what would you call it, circuit breaker,

[3:31:03] Voice 3: certainly the traffic out of the mainland has been reduced considerably.

[3:31:08] Voice 3: Not, interestingly enough, not 100%.

[3:31:11] Voice 3: The traffic to Victoria definitely is still steady.

[3:31:16] Voice 3: Lots of traffic going that way.

[3:31:17] Voice 3: Property values, of course, house sales like all the islands right now,

[3:31:20] Voice 3: we're just all shaking our head and all kind of wondering what's going to happen when the dust settles.

[3:31:25] Voice 3: but otherwise you know everyone's doing well here and looking forward to getting out of lockdown

[3:31:31] Voice 3: soon and getting back to normal by July maybe so that's all I have to say

[3:31:37] Voice 17: let's hope so yeah

[3:31:39] Voice 17: Trustee

[3:31:39] Trustee Maude: Maude I'll just be brief we had a meeting last week that committee discussing SDVRs

[3:31:48] Trustee Maude: the outcome of which basically was to request that CRD implement business licenses and I don't

[3:31:55] Trustee Maude: know if regional planning manager Kojima wants to report it was supposedly going to

[3:32:01] Trustee Maude: self-penders LTC for the first go-around for a model resolution I kind of almost was expecting

[3:32:09] Trustee Maude: it to come this way today but that seems to be sort of the the one next step on

[3:32:15] Trustee Maude: on controlling and managing STB errors.

[3:32:19] Voice 14: Yep, so they discussed it on Friday afternoon

[3:32:23] Voice 14: on self-pender and did adopt a resolution.

[3:32:25] Voice 14: So that'll actually be on Maine's next agenda.

[3:32:28] Voice 14: It's gonna go to all the Southern LTCs

[3:32:30] Voice 14: over the next month or so and Salt Spring as well.

[3:32:33] Voice 14: And then once the direction from the self-pender,

[3:32:36] Voice 14: the consensus, I guess, on the self-pender LTC was,

[3:32:40] Voice 14: let's see what all the other Southern LTCs decision is

[3:32:44] Voice 14: on adopting a similar resolution

[3:32:45] Voice 14: and then send them together to the CRD

[3:32:49] Voice 14: for maximum effect, I guess, effectiveness.

[3:32:54] Voice 17: Yeah.

[3:32:54] Voice 17: Does that include Salt Spring?

[3:32:56] Voice 14: Yes.

[3:32:58] Voice 17: Okay.

[3:33:00] Voice 17: That's good.

[3:33:01] Voice 17: Interesting.

[3:33:02] Voice 17: Good for me to know because one thing I do do

[3:33:05] Voice 17: is I sit as the Island Trust representative

[3:33:07] Voice 17: on the provincial task force on short-term rentals.

[3:33:10] Voice 17: Right.

[3:33:12] Voice 17: Which is somewhat depressing, actually.

[3:33:16] Voice 17: Um, because nobody really has a solution to, but we're doing, we're doing is, you know,

[3:33:24] Voice 17: the solutions they have are basically the ones we have.

[3:33:27] Voice 17: Um, and the, the, um, they do a lot of telling us the forecasting is they're only going to

[3:33:32] Voice 17: get more, more, uh, pronounced because local travel, local tourism is going to become the

[3:33:39] Voice 17: focus over the next number of years, even more so that it already is.

[3:33:43] Voice 17: So great.

[3:33:46] Voice 17: I'm sorry I don't mean to be derogatory about tourists but it just means more more the stuff

[3:33:52] Voice 17: we're going to have to deal with. Okay thank you for those reports there's no conservancy report

[3:33:58] Voice 17: our next regular scheduled meeting is scheduled for June the 21st it says location to be determined

[3:34:05] Voice 17: I think I know our location unless things change dramatically so as is the tradition on

[3:34:12] Voice 17: on Main Island, we have a second town hall.

[3:34:16] Voice 17: So this is your second opportunity to comment

[3:34:21] Voice 17: on anything you've heard today

[3:34:23] Voice 17: or to comment on anything that was on our agenda

[3:34:25] Voice 17: or something that you wish to bring to our attention.

[3:34:28] Voice 17: So if you wish to say something in the town hall,

[3:34:31] Voice 17: please put your hand up with the raised hand button

[3:34:35] Voice 17: and I'll call on you.

[3:34:38] Voice 17: And so far, I'm not seeing anything.

[3:34:41] Voice 17: So if that's the case, I'm going to say that we're going to close the town hall, and we're going to call for adjournment. I see that maybe Trustee Dodds has already adjourned. She just stepped away from her computer. I don't want to adjourn until I'm sure she has no further business.

[3:35:09] Voice 17: Pat, are you okay? I can't hear you.

[3:35:12] Voice 17: um

[3:35:16] Voice 8: yes she's just indisposed for the moment i

[3:35:20] Voice 17: see uh well we could i think i'm pretty sure that

[3:35:25] Voice 17: she'd be okay with us adjourning

[3:35:26] Voice 9: okay

[3:35:27] Voice 17: thanks pat thanks uh thanks david say goodbye to janine for

[3:35:33] Voice 17: me thank you um robert and uh thank you to maple okay i'm doing it 21st take care thank you

[3:35:44] Voice 17: Thank you, everybody, for attending as well.

[3:35:45] Voice 8: Bye.