Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, September 16, 2021

[0:00:06] Planner Mayes: takes a moment to load up on me all right we're good to go over to you chair eagle

[0:00:16] Planner Mayes: great uh hi

[0:00:18] Voice 8: everybody thanks for coming um i guess we're just off and running uh and i don't have the

[0:00:24] Voice 8: agenda up on my screen but i'm pretty sure that the first item of business is the uh the adoption

[0:00:30] Voice 8: of the minutes from the previous meeting did everybody have a chance to owe them look at you

[0:00:35] Voice 8: you saved me just in the nick of time there that was smooth uh so actually we're first we're gonna

[0:00:42] Voice 8: approve the agenda because that's how meetings work and i totally know that um so everybody

[0:00:47] Voice 8: had a chance to uh take a look at the agenda any items to add or any problems with the items that

[0:00:53] Voice 8: are there nope i think we're good so um i guess uh a motion to approve

[0:01:02] Voice 8: the agenda or approved by

[0:01:04] Voice 8: general consent okay great sounds good to me so then we're moving on to 2-1 which is the draft

[0:01:10] Voice 8: minutes of the previous meeting has everybody had a chance to take a look at those

[0:01:14] Voice 8: any comments thoughts concerns problems or a motion to adopt i'll move to

[0:01:26] Voice 6: adopt the minutes prior meeting august 12th and all in favor

[0:01:31] Voice 8: yay of adopting the

[0:01:35] Voice 8: the minutes i think we're good okay we're flying through so that brings us down to our one and only

[0:01:42] Voice 8: business item which is 3.1 uh changes to the residential permissions in the agricultural

[0:01:47] Voice 8: land reserve which is a staff memorandum um who is uh who is the staff that is staffing for us

[0:01:54] Voice 8: today it

[0:01:56] Voice 2: is uh christine and i that that did this report together i've got a brief uh presentation

[0:02:02] Voice 2: presentation, PowerPoint slide, just to sort of introduce it, and then we'll go with the

[0:02:07] Voice 2: discussion. So, I'll just bring up my PowerPoint here.

[0:02:11] Voice 7: Fabulous. All right. It's all you.

[0:02:13] Voice 2: Okay. So, hopefully everyone can see that. And you'll most likely recognize this resolution,

[0:02:23] Voice 2: which was passed at the joint WAPC Ag Alliance meeting with the LTC in July, which was to ask

[0:02:30] Voice 2: staff to prepare a report on options to amend the by-law, land use by-law to accommodate ALC

[0:02:37] Voice 2: announcement on residential flexibility, which is what Christine and I did. We reported to the LTC

[0:02:44] Voice 2: at their meeting on August 31st about what the staff report on options to amend the land use

[0:02:50] Voice 2: by-law in light of the ALC upcoming changes, which will come into effect at the end of the year.

[0:02:56] Voice 2: This is sort of the meaty part of what it says, basically that additional residences will be permitted with less restriction than is currently required for other residences, primarily of relevance, like the Salt Spring, of parcels 40 hectares or less.

[0:03:20] Voice 2: if as long as the main residence is 500 square meters or less they will be permitted

[0:03:25] Voice 2: a second residence of 90 square meters or less and then there is this if it's over 40 hectares

[0:03:34] Voice 2: you're allowed a larger second dwelling so the staff report did consider these policy documents

[0:03:44] Voice 2: in light of presenting changes to the LTC the island trust policy statement the official

[0:03:50] Voice 2: community plan, the existing land use bylaw, the ALC legislation, as well as, as per the LTC

[0:03:57] Voice 2: resolution, the Salt Spring Island area farm plan renewal, a housing needs assessment, and then

[0:04:02] Voice 2: looking at some mechanisms for compliance, which were related to sort of the way forward mentioned

[0:04:10] Voice 2: in the area farm plan renewal. I'm happy to get into more detail on that if you'd like.

[0:04:14] Voice 2: Long and short of it is that the LTC was happy to move forward with this and actually

[0:04:20] Voice 2: directed staff to draft the bylaw and refer it to some groups for their comments, the

[0:04:28] Voice 2: AAPC being one, and then the Housing Action Program Task Force actually considered the

[0:04:35] Voice 2: item earlier today as well at the meeting at one o'clock.

[0:04:38] Voice 2: And I think Christine said that they were supportive of it.

[0:04:42] Voice 2: I'm not exactly sure of the results, but it sounded like they were generally supportive

[0:04:45] Voice 2: of it.

[0:04:47] Voice 2: But so included in the package is the proposed draft bylaw.

[0:04:54] Voice 2: The LTC hadn't actually seen this officially because it wasn't an official draft bylaw at the LTC meeting.

[0:05:01] Voice 2: But they were quite keen to move forward with it and have agricultural groups comment on it.

[0:05:07] Voice 2: So, yeah, it's there for your consideration.

[0:05:10] Voice 2: Christine and I have put forward some recommended wording from some resolutions.

[0:05:15] Voice 2: If you'd like to take some action on it, I'm happy to take any questions that you might have for Christine or I.

[0:05:24] Voice 8: Hey, that was short and sweet. Anybody have any comments, questions?

[0:05:33] Voice 4: Is this so is this bylaw in line with the provincial regulation, the new provincial regulation?

[0:05:44] Voice 2: That's correct, yes.

[0:05:45] Voice 2: It's intended to bring the land use bylaw into conformity with what is being permitted by the ALC as of the end of the year.

[0:05:55] Voice 2: Something I probably breezed over too, I'm not sure if it's on the PowerPoint and Christine can correct me,

[0:06:02] Voice 2: but there is a recommendation to bring the number of campsites permitted into greater conformity with the ALC regulation

[0:06:11] Voice 2: because currently the land use bylaw permits 50 um the ALC restricts that further down to 10 so

[0:06:18] Voice 2: there's a a change there to bring an integrated conformity as well hey

[0:06:25] Voice 5: I just have a question

[0:06:26] Voice 5: for you is it Geordie Geordie that's right

[0:06:28] Voice 5: yeah okay yeah hi Reid Bailey I'm a land use planner

[0:06:31] Voice 5: with the ministry of agriculture hello um yeah happy to be part of the call thanks for letting

[0:06:36] Voice 5: me join by the way first time on this call so that's great uh I was just wondering did did you

[0:06:42] Voice 5: you guys consider possibly um you know further restricting what the ALC permits because you know

[0:06:49] Voice 5: you don't have to obviously allow the maximum was there any thought to given okay maybe we won't

[0:06:54] Voice 5: allow 90 square meters you know we'll restrict that further to 50 or 60 or you know we'll only

[0:06:59] Voice 5: allow certain parcel sizes or a whole bunch of other things that you kind of could have done

[0:07:03] Voice 5: or was it you know your intent to go to the max kind of right away yeah

[0:07:08] Voice 2: I mean Christine might

[0:07:09] Voice 2: have comments on this as well in terms of how we evaluated it um i think 90 square meters is

[0:07:15] Voice 2: fairly in line with other additional residences we've permitted in the land use bylaw previously

[0:07:20] Voice 2: we did undertake a bylaw that expanded for example um seasonal cottage permissions

[0:07:28] Voice 2: uh recently on a number of or about 400 properties on salt spring and that that floor area was also

[0:07:33] Voice 2: 90 square meters so it was sort of within the realm of what had been considered acceptable

[0:07:38] Voice 2: of all previously in the land use bylaw.

[0:07:40] Voice 2: So I don't know that there was a lot of consideration

[0:07:42] Voice 2: from planning staff on restricting that down further.

[0:07:47] Voice 2: But, you know, this is, as I say,

[0:07:49] Voice 2: the early stages of the bylaw referral.

[0:07:52] Voice 2: I think if we hear comments from agricultural community

[0:07:55] Voice 2: that they have recommendations

[0:07:57] Voice 2: that they would be incorporated into the bylaw.

[0:08:04] Voice 4: If I may have a comment,

[0:08:06] Voice 4: I don't think that we should be too hasty in making changes to what the government has recommended.

[0:08:16] Voice 4: I've been on this committee now for about 25 years, and we've been fighting for housing on farmland for 25 years.

[0:08:23] Voice 4: We finally get some success, and all of a sudden, it sounds like we want to put the brakes on it or head it off or diminish it in some way, shape, or form.

[0:08:37] Voice 5: Ken, I'd just like to clarify, too, we don't recommend that.

[0:08:40] Voice 5: Like, it wasn't, you know, we don't recommend anything.

[0:08:43] Voice 5: Like, when the legislation was crafted, that's just what the legislation says.

[0:08:47] Voice 5: But by no means does, you know, the government or the ALC recommend you do that.

[0:08:51] Voice 5: I mean, you can do whatever you want, right?

[0:08:54] Voice 5: But, you know, we don't

[0:08:56] Voice 5: endorse that, so to speak.

[0:08:57] Voice 5: It's not.

[0:08:58] Voice 4: This isn't through the ALC, though, right?

[0:09:00] Voice 4: right? This is a provincial regulation and we don't even have to apply to the ALC to build a

[0:09:07] Voice 4: second dwelling now.

[0:09:08] Voice 5: No, precisely. I was just saying, you know, you said the government

[0:09:11] Voice 5: recommends that we don't actually recommend it. It's just now legislation, whether it's,

[0:09:15] Voice 5: you know, recommended or not.

[0:09:19] Voice 7: John, it looked like you had something.

[0:09:22] Voice 3: Yeah. I'm concerned about a couple different things and I don't know

[0:09:30] Voice 3: what freedom we have given that this is seems fait accompli this is just something that's got

[0:09:37] Voice 3: to go with provincial legislation I'm concerned that the housing doesn't have to be for farm use

[0:09:47] Voice 3: in the past it always has been and Ken you like you said we've been arguing for more housing for

[0:09:54] Voice 3: or farmworkers. We haven't been arguing for more housing just period so developers could go put

[0:10:00] Voice 3: condos on farmland. And so that's something that I'm still concerned about. And I still don't see

[0:10:04] Voice 3: anything in the proposed changes that will protect farmland for farm use, which farmworker

[0:10:12] Voice 3: housing does. And I'm all for adding more farmworker housing because I think we're going

[0:10:16] Voice 3: to have more manual labor, we're going to have more less mechanization in the future, and we're

[0:10:21] Voice 3: going to need more workers. Another thing that concerns me is the reduction in campsites. And

[0:10:28] Voice 3: because as many of you know, when you have woofers and volunteers and even paid employees

[0:10:34] Voice 3: coming for the summer, we don't always have a place to put them. And 50 was comfortable. There's

[0:10:40] Voice 3: lots of room in there for you to house everyone that you needed, or at least tent everyone you

[0:10:44] Voice 3: needed, if not housed. And now I'm concerned that it's been reduced to 10 and we could find

[0:10:49] Voice 3: ourselves in non-compliance when during peak harvest needs we have 12 people camping here

[0:10:55] Voice 3: helping out so i don't know how to you know get this on the record or change anything because

[0:11:02] Voice 3: this seems like fait accompli this is provincial legislation that we more or less seem to have

[0:11:07] Voice 3: imposed on us did

[0:11:13] Voice 8: uh either uh jordy or christine do you want to respond to that before i

[0:11:16] Voice 2: just just

[0:11:18] Voice 2: Just to clarify, and maybe Reid could clarify this point too,

[0:11:22] Voice 2: you know, it's certainly not a foregone conclusion.

[0:11:25] Voice 2: I mean, local governments can be more restrictive than the ALC, right?

[0:11:29] Voice 2: This is just giving local governments the ability

[0:11:32] Voice 2: or essentially saying that, you know,

[0:11:36] Voice 2: you don't have to apply to the ALC anymore for this,

[0:11:38] Voice 2: but certainly there is still the ability,

[0:11:40] Voice 2: if it's the will of the group,

[0:11:42] Voice 2: to be more restrictive than the ALC allows.

[0:11:45] Voice 2: house. Within the draft bylaw, there is the distinction between a farmworker dwelling

[0:11:52] Voice 2: unit as well as a seasonal or a full-time rental cottage. So maybe there's some tinkering

[0:12:00] Voice 2: there that you'd like to do with how that's worded. The idea being that a farmworker dwelling

[0:12:09] Voice 2: dwelling is has a little bit less regulation to to deal with than a full-time rental cottage

[0:12:16] Voice 2: so there's a bit of an incentive there hopefully to you know to build a farm worker dwelling as

[0:12:20] Voice 2: opposed to a full-time rental cottage and then the the campsite question I'm not sure how to

[0:12:28] Voice 2: answer that one I mean the I think that's just to bring it in line with with ALC regulation

[0:12:34] Voice 2: regulation um on the on the number of sort of agritourism accommodation units i think is as

[0:12:39] Voice 2: their phrase there but i don't know if reid has any comment on that yeah

[0:12:43] Voice 5: so yeah and like the

[0:12:44] Voice 5: additional housing regulation that's passed you're right that is a fade that complete in that in that

[0:12:49] Voice 5: sense but local governments have full control over residential uses on the alr within their

[0:12:57] Voice 5: community as long as they're within the bounds of the agricultural act so like you don't have to

[0:13:01] Voice 5: to allow any secondary residences you don't even have to allow a principal residence if you don't

[0:13:06] Voice 5: like there's no local governments that do that in the province but the point being is if you if you

[0:13:12] Voice 5: guys determine that hey you don't want these secondary houses or you know alternatively you

[0:13:16] Voice 5: only want them in support of agricultural operations you're fully within your power

[0:13:21] Voice 5: to regulate to that extent like it really is very wide very broad in the sense of what what you can

[0:13:28] Voice 5: do i mean you can make a condition you know the property has to have bc assessment farm

[0:13:32] Voice 5: classification or they have to have 10 acres in production or or whatever you want right so

[0:13:37] Voice 5: you really the world's your oyster in terms of how you want to to put forward this regulation

[0:13:43] Voice 5: within your your land use bylaw so very

[0:13:47] Voice 3: flexible if i may

[0:13:49] Voice 3: madam chair um i by no means have

[0:13:53] Voice 3: anything as prepared as a motion but I would like us to consider perhaps taking some action that

[0:14:02] Voice 3: would recommend giving farm worker housing a higher priority in this and because I fear oh

[0:14:09] Voice 3: yeah a farmer's going to find it more profitable to put condos on his property and rent them out

[0:14:14] Voice 3: than to actually do farming and as for the camping I would like some I don't see anything in this

[0:14:21] Voice 3: document that points to it, but I'd like some assurance from the planners that farmers are

[0:14:26] Voice 3: still going to be able to camp temporary workers. I believe this language is more for

[0:14:34] Voice 3: agritourism, as Reid mentioned, and I'd like some assurance that routine agricultural use,

[0:14:40] Voice 3: that we aren't going to have people coming around saying, no, you have too many tents set up here.

[0:14:44] Voice 3: Okay,

[0:14:48] Voice 8: and I think we'll definitely keep that as we work towards making a motion.

[0:14:55] Voice 8: Conrad, you had something a minute ago.

[0:14:57] Voice 9: Yeah, I just wanted to say, Bree, that for a number of years, for quite a long time,

[0:15:03] Voice 9: at the Area Farm Plan, at the actual advisory committee, we talked about farm worker housing

[0:15:11] Voice 9: and the need for farm worker housing.

[0:15:13] Voice 9: and we we attempted to give the islands trust some parameters to work within in terms of

[0:15:23] Voice 9: the size of the dwellings the operation of the farm the location of the buildings and so on and

[0:15:29] Voice 9: so forth and then all of a sudden in in july this year the actual land commission comes on and says

[0:15:37] Voice 9: it's a free-for-all you know you have an open field here and the problem i have with that is

[0:15:43] Voice 9: is that, and I'm picking up on Yann's point,

[0:15:46] Voice 9: is that you may end up with housing

[0:15:48] Voice 9: that's not directed for farm worker housing.

[0:15:50] Voice 9: We have agricultural land

[0:15:52] Voice 9: and we want to support agriculture.

[0:15:55] Voice 9: And I think that making housing predominantly

[0:15:58] Voice 9: for the use of the farm,

[0:16:00] Voice 9: for the use of developing and maintaining and improving

[0:16:04] Voice 9: the farm should be the primary goal of any bylaw

[0:16:08] Voice 9: that deals with expanding housing in the ALR

[0:16:11] Voice 9: or in any agriculture zone so the first requirement in both the the the first uh area

[0:16:18] Voice 9: farm plan in 2007 and and the most recent one in 2020 the first requirement is that the the

[0:16:26] Voice 9: properties have farm status and that there be a direct link between the need for farm worker

[0:16:31] Voice 9: housing and the operation of the farm that's basically where i'm at

[0:16:39] Voice 8: christine you got something

[0:16:41] Voice 8: thing there yeah sure

[0:16:43] Planner Mayes: and um you know i guess i'll share my screen as as the portion of the

[0:16:47] Planner Mayes: staff report so this this mirrors i guess um the bylaw that's being proposed in front of you and so

[0:16:53] Planner Mayes: you know what i will note you know the two a and b they're the pre-existing you know pre-existing

[0:17:00] Planner Mayes: dwellings that um you know actually would predate our current land use bylaw which is 2001

[0:17:07] Planner Mayes: and one, perhaps even before that, we'd need to do a little bit more research as to when or if

[0:17:13] Planner Mayes: two dwellings were ever permitted on agricultural land. The mobile home, again, you know, is a date

[0:17:19] Planner Mayes: range. The two that are sort of added were either the farm worker dwelling, and that's not to exceed

[0:17:26] Planner Mayes: 90 square meters for the agricultural land that's classified under the Assessment Act.

[0:17:30] Planner Mayes: As you were noting, both Commissioner Pilon and Commissioner Steinman, the one that, you know,

[0:17:38] Planner Mayes: I guess is potentially something that could be problematic in the comments that you've made is

[0:17:43] Planner Mayes: the full-time rental cottage and so you know you could perhaps you know remove that one um if if

[0:17:52] Planner Mayes: that is sort of the route that you wish to go um is that that's the one that was was included you

[0:17:58] Planner Mayes: know the secondary suites the mobile homes um all those were were already in the current regulations

[0:18:05] Planner Mayes: which you can see on the left-hand side.

[0:18:08] Planner Mayes: And this is the proposal that's in the current bylaw

[0:18:12] Planner Mayes: that you're considering.

[0:18:18] Voice 5: And just one point on to Conrad's point too,

[0:18:21] Voice 5: I just wanted to say to give you,

[0:18:23] Voice 5: I won't get too into it

[0:18:24] Voice 5: and I don't want to say too much

[0:18:26] Voice 5: because then I get fired,

[0:18:27] Voice 5: but not everyone in the ministry

[0:18:29] Voice 5: was happy with this regulation.

[0:18:33] Voice 5: A lot of us really tried to fight

[0:18:35] Voice 5: to tie the secondary house to farming.

[0:18:39] Voice 5: Which seems like such a simple concept to me, at least, and to many of you by the sounds of it.

[0:18:45] Voice 5: But the higher uppers decided that they don't want to do that.

[0:18:49] Voice 5: So this is what we're left with.

[0:18:51] Voice 5: And that's why I have been encouraging local governments to really let them know that they do have this authority to, again, regulate that, regulate farther down.

[0:19:04] Voice 5: So, again, you can tie it to farming.

[0:19:06] Voice 5: You can tie it to BC assessment.

[0:19:07] Voice 5: you could ties to acres being planted or a number of animal units or or however you want to do it

[0:19:11] Voice 5: there's various ways where you can prevent you know speculators from simply buying properties

[0:19:17] Voice 5: and building two homes and just renting them like there's there's ways to avoid that if you craft

[0:19:22] Voice 5: your bylaw carefully so that's yeah my word of caution i suppose all

[0:19:29] Voice 7: right ahead conrad i think

[0:19:34] Voice 7: you're muted there on right it's

[0:19:44] Voice 5: gonna have to start again there you go there

[0:19:46] Voice 9: you go i got it

[0:19:46] Voice 9: now i i'm guessing i'm i'm um i'm thinking that the reason why the um they opened it up in such

[0:19:55] Voice 9: a broad term in terms of making the regulation as it is as it's being presented has a lot to do with

[0:20:01] Voice 9: with try to get compliance or to enforce compliance.

[0:20:05] Voice 9: When we did the area farm plan in 2020,

[0:20:09] Voice 9: we looked at a number of ways of doing that,

[0:20:12] Voice 9: including statutory declarations,

[0:20:15] Voice 9: some sort of a deposit for removing farm worker housing

[0:20:20] Voice 9: that's not related to farm operation.

[0:20:23] Voice 9: We really struggled with that.

[0:20:24] Voice 9: And I'm presuming that when the ALC did this

[0:20:27] Voice 9: and the provincial government issued this

[0:20:29] Voice 9: is that they they probably had a real long and serious look at how do you enforce compliance to

[0:20:36] Voice 9: farm operation because it was one thing to just get it squared to the farm having it for farm

[0:20:44] Voice 9: workers for farm it was another thing to enforce it and i'm can anybody comment on that because my

[0:20:50] Voice 9: that's my sense is that the reason it was left wide open like this has a lot to do with how do

[0:20:57] Voice 9: local governments enforce the compliance for that kind of need if anybody has a comment on that I

[0:21:04] Voice 9: appreciate it looks

[0:21:06] Voice 8: like you do Jordy are you ready to yeah

[0:21:08] Voice 2: so I obviously can't comment on

[0:21:10] Voice 2: sort of the development of the provincial legislation but from from staff perspective

[0:21:15] Voice 2: and there is a discussion on this in the staff report around mechanisms to ensure compliance

[0:21:20] Voice 2: clients um we do currently occasionally require um statutory declarations for uh farm buildings

[0:21:29] Voice 2: you know to where we're so maybe i would say skeptical that farming is occurring just to

[0:21:35] Voice 2: ensure that the the owner is well aware of the requirements of how that building is to be used

[0:21:39] Voice 2: i would say they're of limited legal enforceability um because they're not you know they're just sort

[0:21:46] Voice 2: of a an indication that the owner is they can't sort of claim ignorance later on that they're

[0:21:51] Voice 2: well aware of the requirement at the time a covenant is certainly much more legally

[0:21:57] Voice 2: restrictive and enforceable the issue i think that we the trust might find with with covenants is um

[0:22:06] Voice 2: the administration of them the staff time required for both the preparation and ensuring that they're

[0:22:12] Voice 2: they're going to be enforced, that we have the resources to do so.

[0:22:16] Voice 2: So that's sort of the issue, I think, with those two compliance mechanisms.

[0:22:22] Voice 2: I think probably the most straightforward would be the Farm Assessment

[0:22:27] Voice 2: under the Assessment Act is a good benchmark.

[0:22:31] Voice 2: The issue that I've come up against in my planning world is sometimes

[0:22:36] Voice 2: I have conversations with people that are looking to begin a farm.

[0:22:42] Voice 2: and they say that they require additional housing to get that farm status so it's a bit of a chicken

[0:22:48] Voice 2: or the egg argument i don't know if there's you know perhaps you're obviously in a much better

[0:22:53] Voice 2: position to comment on on that issue but it's something that i've come up against that if we

[0:22:57] Voice 2: restrict it to um farm assessment only then it might prevent some people from moving forward

[0:23:04] Voice 2: with their plans for farming

[0:23:06] Voice 5: yeah the one thing i'll add to that gordy is i um i've yeah i've

[0:23:13] Voice 5: I've worked kind of in all areas of the province regard regarding that and I guess I'm naturally

[0:23:19] Voice 5: a pessimistic person because I've seen it so often where someone claims oh we need this secondary

[0:23:24] Voice 5: residence to start our farm and and then it's built and there's no farm right it just never

[0:23:29] Voice 5: it never comes to fruition and um I'm not talking of one or two examples I'm talking

[0:23:34] Voice 5: of dozens where that's that's happened not necessarily in Salt Spring Island but um so

[0:23:39] Voice 5: So that, I mean, that's certainly a consideration of these promises of agriculture are largely, you know, weightless often, unfortunately, but that is the reality is kind of my experiences.

[0:23:52] Voice 5: But anyhow.

[0:24:00] Voice 7: Go right ahead, Jan.

[0:24:01] Voice 7: Okay,

[0:24:03] Voice 3: it's my impression that if we link something to farm tax status, it has considerably more teeth.

[0:24:11] Voice 3: my understanding is that 100 percent of farm tax status applications are audited in the first

[0:24:21] Voice 3: three years and we certainly had ours audited approximately two years after we first requested

[0:24:27] Voice 3: farm tax status so it seems like this is a good mechanism in place already for ensuring that at

[0:24:35] Voice 3: at least $2,500 worth of farm product

[0:24:39] Voice 3: is being produced off of a site.

[0:24:41] Voice 3: I

[0:24:49] Voice 9: would certainly agree with you on that.

[0:24:52] Voice 9: Like I said before, in the area farm plan,

[0:24:55] Voice 9: the very first requirement, if you like,

[0:24:58] Voice 9: that we looked at was that at minimum,

[0:25:02] Voice 9: the property in question for getting the housing

[0:25:04] Voice 9: would have farm status.

[0:25:07] Voice 9: Absolutely.

[0:25:12] Voice 9: I think it's important.

[0:25:14] Voice 6: I think it's important to clarify in this case, though, that the difference between tax status, right, and farm status.

[0:25:22] Voice 6: So that's an important distinction, right?

[0:25:24] Voice 6: And that's to avoid this chicken and egg situation that Jordi was talking about, perhaps, that one could claim the farm tax status before formally receiving it.

[0:25:32] Voice 6: it. And I would just add that, particularly since we're dealing with ALR land here, there's

[0:25:39] Voice 6: certainly a consideration of the benefit of being able to make use of essentially non-agricultural

[0:25:48] Voice 6: land that's a part of the ALR, right? So there's a number of us here in Salt Spring, myself

[0:25:53] Voice 6: included, that their properties, there's a portion that's totally useless culturally,

[0:25:58] Voice 6: early and we could really benefit from having additional people living there but yeah so and

[0:26:06] Voice 6: likewise in keeping the spirit of the community plan to encourage additional residences that I

[0:26:14] Voice 6: don't think we want to restrict ourselves too closely too firmly but I am also very much in

[0:26:20] Voice 6: support of trying to encourage and ensure that the additional dwellings are for farm workers.

[0:26:27] Voice 5: You brought up an interesting point too, Nathan, about siting, which is critically important to the secondary residents. And I mean, I tend to agree with you too. If you're putting the secondary residents on some rocky bluff that's never going to be in production, wonderful, great.

[0:26:40] Voice 5: great but you know if you're plunking it down in the middle of an active field well not so good

[0:26:46] Voice 5: right so again they're citing and sizing kind of mechanisms that you guys could utilize as well to

[0:26:51] Voice 5: ensure that you know class one two three land or land that's under production or what have you is

[0:26:57] Voice 5: not being um taken up taken taken over so all right

[0:27:09] Voice 8: um so it feels like uh we're we're working

[0:27:14] Voice 8: towards having an opinion on this that's that's kind of cohesive it sounds like uh if we were

[0:27:20] Voice 8: going to um recommend that the trust move forward with with this uh bylaw amendment we would want to

[0:27:27] Voice 8: add some conditions to it or if we're going to recommend that they don't it's because of some

[0:27:33] Voice 8: reasons that have been brought up during the conversation the the notes that i have uh focus on

[0:27:38] Voice 8: sort of three things uh that there's no emphasis on on a distinction between farm worker housing

[0:27:44] Voice 8: and rental rental income uh housing the second one was about campsites uh trying to make a

[0:27:52] Voice 8: distinction between agritourism campsites and temporary worker housing uh and the restriction

[0:27:58] Voice 8: from 50 sites down to 10 could actually be have a negative impact and then the third thing uh

[0:28:04] Voice 8: seem to be maybe trying to do something where we tie the extra, the access to the extra housing

[0:28:11] Voice 8: to farm status or BC assessment as a benchmark. So those are the things that I sort of was noting.

[0:28:18] Voice 8: Does somebody have a sense that they would like to make those points into a motion or

[0:28:22] Voice 8: further conversation? Go ahead, Conrad.

[0:28:30] Voice 9: I just want to add one point, if I could, is that

[0:28:33] Voice 9: but once you've sent a message in regards to farm worker housing

[0:28:40] Voice 9: or expanding housing on agricultural land,

[0:28:43] Voice 9: is there a sense out there that this will also have an impact

[0:28:46] Voice 9: on non-ALR requirements for farms,

[0:28:53] Voice 9: properties that have farm status on Salt Spring Island?

[0:28:57] Voice 9: What I'm saying is that if we're doing it over here on farms,

[0:29:01] Voice 9: that got farms or land that has farm status in the ALR, are we in the future looking at or proposing

[0:29:08] Voice 9: to look at farms that are not in the ALR having the same kind of support or mechanisms?

[0:29:17] Planner Mayes: So I can

[0:29:18] Planner Mayes: certainly speak to that. So what's occurred out of our meeting is our local trust committee

[0:29:22] Planner Mayes: has also directed staff to report back to them regarding amendments to section 3.17 of our land

[0:29:30] Planner Mayes: use bylaw and so currently that particular bylaw um or sorry regulation allows people with

[0:29:38] Planner Mayes: properties over 20 hectares who have farm tax status um to be able to build up to three houses

[0:29:47] Planner Mayes: and so you know the amount of properties uh you know i'm i'm not sure how far into the

[0:29:54] Planner Mayes: the the weeds you guys um got on that but um there was some discussion about this particular

[0:30:00] Planner Mayes: topic and it was noted that there's 187 properties outside the ALR that have farm status of that 24

[0:30:09] Planner Mayes: or 20 hectares and what we sort of noted was that there is a potential for utilizing subdivision

[0:30:19] Planner Mayes: potential into housing so to convert density that exists on a property to allow people to build

[0:30:27] Planner Mayes: their houses by sort of amending this this regulation that we have and so this

[0:30:32] Planner Mayes: would potentially benefit 55 properties which have potential subdivision or sorry

[0:30:41] Planner Mayes: possible subdivision potential and so that report should be forthcoming to the

[0:30:45] Planner Mayes: local trust committee at their October meeting.

[0:30:55] Voice 7: Thank you for that. Go ahead Jan.

[0:30:59] Voice 7: Yeah,

[0:31:02] Voice 3: I'm curious if, I know some of the other islands have what they call aggregated density,

[0:31:10] Voice 3: where if you had the right to do a subdivision, you could build the houses that you would get

[0:31:18] Voice 3: from doing such a subdivision without actually going through an actual subdivision process.

[0:31:23] Voice 3: And if staff has any ideas about that, or if it's known if that's being considered for Salt Spring?

[0:31:31] Planner Mayes: Yeah, that's exactly what the amendments are proposing, is to utilize existing subdivision potential for farm worker, for properties with farm tax status.

[0:31:44] Voice 3: Okay, I just wanted to say that, yeah, I've long been in favor of allowing aggregated density to increase housing on farmland, as long as it's for farm workers.

[0:31:56] Voice 3: and I think that's where a number of us are unhappy or at least confused about the current

[0:32:02] Voice 3: changes in that it appears that that might be abused at some point.

[0:32:11] Planner Mayes: Yeah so certainly you know

[0:32:13] Planner Mayes: this particular section of the staff report speaks to it so this was sort of the the rough

[0:32:18] Planner Mayes: draft of the proposal to to amend that regulation to you know specify a flurry limit you know that

[0:32:28] Planner Mayes: it would have to be classified as a firm under the assessment act as well as granting the local trust

[0:32:33] Planner Mayes: committee a covenant to prohibit further subdivision of lot if that were taken um taken

[0:32:39] Planner Mayes: advantage of okay

[0:32:48] Voice 7: i'm happy with that okay

[0:32:52] Planner Mayes: i would imagine that our local trust committee will

[0:32:55] Planner Mayes: probably refer that to you guys at a separate meeting we certainly did propose this as two

[0:33:00] Planner Mayes: two separate bylaws, mainly because we didn't want one to hold up the other, as they're two

[0:33:08] Planner Mayes: separate conversations. So certainly, I think, you know, they're, you know, I can't speak on

[0:33:12] Planner Mayes: behalf of the Local Trust Committee, but you know, whether or not they wish expedience on

[0:33:16] Planner Mayes: the matter of changing the agricultural regulations.

[0:33:26] Voice 7: Go ahead, Connor. It's just a

[0:33:30] Voice 7: a comment

[0:33:30] Voice 9: uh brie i you know um can you been uh on this island forever you know most of the old

[0:33:39] Voice 9: farmers on this island and you've been farming here all your life what do you think is their

[0:33:44] Voice 9: take on this who are these changes i'm curious because you you have a have a lot of experience

[0:33:49] Voice 9: about farming and farm people on this island what's your what's what's your sense what's

[0:33:55] Voice 9: your take on this

[0:33:56] Voice 4: regarding old-time farms yeah

[0:33:59] Voice 9: and regarding how they will react to this or or

[0:34:01] Voice 9: just a general feel about what's happening in because a lot of us around this table are are

[0:34:08] Voice 9: new to this side and i've only been here you know a couple of decades and so on and so forth

[0:34:12] Voice 9: but you've been here forever and you you you have a you've had a large farm and your family's had

[0:34:17] Voice 9: large farms what's your sense of this well

[0:34:20] Voice 4: anyone that i've talked to you know the old-time families

[0:34:24] Voice 4: that are around that are still farming um some of them well of course they have mixed feelings over

[0:34:32] Voice 4: it but they rather welcome the idea of being able to have an extra home on their farms um for farm

[0:34:41] Voice 4: help and a lot of us are a lot of us are kind of getting on and if we could have an extra home on

[0:34:48] Voice 4: on the farm so we can keep the farm in production.

[0:34:52] Voice 4: So I look at my dad, the last few years,

[0:34:56] Voice 4: he was on his farm living on his own

[0:35:01] Voice 4: and he lost his farm status

[0:35:04] Voice 4: because he was no longer farming.

[0:35:07] Voice 4: If we could have had somebody there with him

[0:35:09] Voice 4: to keep the farm going, it would have been beneficial

[0:35:13] Voice 4: and he would have saved those taxes

[0:35:15] Voice 4: that we ended up paying because it wasn't being farmed.

[0:35:18] Voice 4: even though i still took the hay off it but they wouldn't count that so we lost farm status on that

[0:35:27] Voice 4: farm so i think having the extra home um i think will would be beneficial in that respect

[0:35:34] Voice 4: yeah

[0:35:40] Voice 7: go ahead uh

[0:35:43] Voice 3: yeah ken i'm just curious about how he could lose his farm status if you if he

[0:35:50] Voice 3: was effectively selling the hay was this kind of a uh favor and no money changed hands or something

[0:35:56] Voice 3: because uh most most lots you only need twenty five hundred dollars and we sold three thousand

[0:36:01] Voice 3: dollars worth of hay this year off of our farm

[0:36:03] Voice 4: yeah yeah well i put it up for him for free

[0:36:08] Voice 4: and he sold what he could um he still well he ended up getting rid of his animals because we

[0:36:14] Voice 4: couldn't take care of them and we couldn't always guarantee that we could get there and feed them

[0:36:19] Voice 4: every day so we ended up getting rid of them but yeah uh he did pocket a little bit of money for

[0:36:25] Voice 4: the hay but um you're just more interested in getting it off the field so it wasn't a fire

[0:36:31] Voice 4: hazard yeah we actually uh fought to get it back on um but they denied it okay

[0:36:48] Voice 7: uh any other thoughts

[0:36:51] Voice 7: on on

[0:36:53] Voice 8: this uh bylaw or are we are we ready to anybody have a thought of a recommendation they'd

[0:37:00] Voice 8: like to make here of course it's you Conrad go ahead sorry

[0:37:06] Voice 9: about this um and looking at the

[0:37:10] Voice 9: report the recommendation number two to a direct staff to draft that bylaw but in that bylaw to

[0:37:16] Voice 9: to address the issues that have been raised by the committee here which is having some conformity

[0:37:23] Voice 9: around farm status and farm operation and supporting agriculture we need we need to

[0:37:29] Voice 9: reinforced as wordings within within the bylaw um and i think some of the things that has been shown

[0:37:35] Voice 9: up on here and recommendation number two is basically what i'm talking about is um i would

[0:37:41] Voice 9: support that kind of approach yes thank you all

[0:37:51] Voice 8: right uh i can't i can see everybody sort of now

[0:37:56] Voice 8: uh anybody else have a a comment or it sounded like conrad you're halfway towards being ready

[0:38:03] Voice 8: to make the motion there uh if everybody feels like number two that we're thinking about

[0:38:10] Voice 8: recommending proceeding uh with uh with the with the bylaw subject to some conditions

[0:38:18] Voice 6: so just to clarify am i understanding that it would be contentioned on the farm tax status

[0:38:25] Voice 6: and then we're also proposing to remove the seasonal cottage dwelling or were you

[0:38:29] Voice 6: wanted to leave that and discuss young go ahead

[0:38:35] Voice 7: um

[0:38:36] Voice 3: i would uh move that it looks like our hands

[0:38:41] Voice 3: are tied in a lot of ways but i would move that the full-time rental cottage um not be removed

[0:38:48] Voice 3: but be amended so that it says a full-time uh farm worker cottage it seems to me like that is uh

[0:38:56] Voice 3: about all the flexibility we have and under those conditions uh i'd be willing to uh proceed

[0:39:03] Voice 3: um with the recommendation okay

[0:39:10] Voice 8: so jan um do you want to go ahead and and make that uh

[0:39:16] Voice 8: your your motion then that we get

[0:39:19] Voice 3: christine's hand up so i think i'm sorry i don't i can't see you

[0:39:22] Voice 8: on my screen christine's go right ahead i'm

[0:39:25] Planner Mayes: sorry i did want to touch on the seasonal cottage you

[0:39:27] Planner Mayes: you can't quite see it. The bylaw does propose to delete that as a use. So generally speaking,

[0:39:35] Planner Mayes: you know, the use of bed and breakfast and or bedrooms in a home, you know, is permitted under

[0:39:43] Planner Mayes: the agricultural land reserve. And, you know, the staff report does touch upon sort of, you know,

[0:39:50] Planner Mayes: with the challenges of seasonal cottages, again, you know, in order to build them,

[0:39:54] Planner Mayes: And to utilize them, the farm operation itself would have to have farm tax status. So I was just going to note, you know, there is C, which does reference that farm worker dwelling up to 90 square meters classified as a farm under the Assessment Act.

[0:40:13] Planner Mayes: So, you know, potentially I think what Jan might have been saying was the removal of D.

[0:40:20] Planner Mayes: And I guess maybe I would point out F as well, whether or not that might be a consideration for you guys as well in that conversation.

[0:40:35] Voice 3: I'm not in favor of removing any of these if we can specify that they're for farm worker use.

[0:40:44] Voice 3: use. In particular, Dee says a full-time rental cottage, which kind of implies that it's not for

[0:40:50] Voice 3: farmworker use, but on the open market for rental.

[0:40:55] Planner Mayes: That's right. And maybe, you know,

[0:40:57] Planner Mayes: Jordi certainly touched upon the reason between the two. So a full-time rental cottage has some

[0:41:03] Planner Mayes: additional regulations that a dwelling that would be built for farmworkers would not. So that

[0:41:10] Planner Mayes: That includes rainwater catchment system for potable water and the storage that's included in that, as well as some additional siting regulations.

[0:41:20] Planner Mayes: And so that's why the two, although similar, you know, they were included.

[0:41:26] Planner Mayes: So certainly, you know, hopefully that provides some context as to staff's inclusion of those two separate ones.

[0:41:47] Voice 7: All right.

[0:41:48] Voice 7: Right. So

[0:41:52] Voice 8: now I am just sort of waiting for somebody to to go for it here.

[0:42:02] Voice 8: Conrad or Jan or Nathan, anybody have a sense of emotion that you'd like to make or can or Conrad?

[0:42:14] Voice 8: head um yeah

[0:42:20] Voice 9: go go ahead yes yeah

[0:42:24] Voice 3: i feel like uh the u.s supreme court justice who said something

[0:42:29] Voice 3: like uh i don't know how to define pornography but i know it when i see it and i don't know

[0:42:36] Voice 3: how to form this into a motion other than that we express our concern that the proposed draft

[0:42:44] Voice 3: bylaw preserve that it be primarily to support farmworker housing and not additional rental

[0:42:51] Voice 3: housing. So I'm a little confused. And Christine, you did a great job of explaining this, but it

[0:42:56] Voice 3: still isn't clear in my head how all this stuff fits together in a way that will protect fundamentally

[0:43:05] Voice 3: that new housing on farmland should be for farmworkers and not for building condos. And

[0:43:13] Planner Mayes: I see Geordie's got his hand up, so I'm going to pass the floor to him.

[0:43:16] Voice 2: Sure. If it sounds a bit like you're moving towards wanting to have the additional housing be for farm workers only,

[0:43:27] Voice 2: I might suggest then that you, but it sounds like you want the LTC to proceed with the bylaw in some form,

[0:43:35] Voice 2: but then to proceed with the draft bylaw but to delete or subject or conditional upon deleting

[0:43:44] Voice 2: use d and f depending on how you feel about that larger dwelling because by deleting d

[0:43:54] Voice 2: you're removing the possibility of a full-time rental cottage you keep the farm worker dwelling

[0:43:59] Voice 2: um and then you remove the ability to build a dwelling unit on a lot over 40 hectares so you're

[0:44:09] Voice 2: left with um a pre-existing dwelling unit constructed before february 22nd 2019 or b

[0:44:15] Voice 2: a mobile home constructed between july 4th 2019 and december 31st 2021 and then c a farm workers

[0:44:23] Voice 2: dwelling unit not exceeding 90 square meters in floor area on agricultural land classified as a

[0:44:29] Voice 2: farm under the assessment act and e which would i guess in effect become d a secondary suite subject

[0:44:35] Voice 2: to section 3.16 so i would just just say you know subject to deletion of whichever letters you you'd

[0:44:46] Voice 2: like there

[0:44:46] Planner Mayes: and you know i might tag on to that and say alternatively you could take f and specify

[0:44:57] Planner Mayes: specify that that's a farm worker dwelling in accordance with a classified farm under

[0:45:02] Planner Mayes: Assessment Act.

[0:45:03] Planner Mayes: It's the same language as C. I mean, the volume of farms in the ALR over 40 hectares, you

[0:45:10] Planner Mayes: know, could be an interesting number to run for you guys to understand how many properties

[0:45:15] Planner Mayes: would benefit from that.

[0:45:17] Planner Mayes: I couldn't answer that question, but certainly, you know, also something to consider.

[0:45:22] Planner Mayes: consider

[0:45:25] Voice 6: my personal opinion as perhaps stepping out of line and coming from a farming perspective

[0:45:31] Voice 6: i think um yeah a large dwelling unit for farmers is not necessary so i'd be in favor of moving

[0:45:52] Voice 7: all

[0:45:52] Voice 8: right so we're back where we were before looking at these uh these recommendations um

[0:46:01] Voice 8: it feels very much like we're heading towards two uh that we want to recommend

[0:46:07] Voice 8: that the LTC proceed with the by-law subject

[0:46:11] Voice 8: to certain conditions.

[0:46:13] Voice 8: I can't make the motion, I don't think, so somebody-

[0:46:16] Voice 6: I will go ahead and make a motion then.

[0:46:19] Voice 6: So I will propose too that we proceed with the by-law

[0:46:24] Voice 6: subject to the deletion of conditions D and F,

[0:46:32] Voice 6: which those are the seasonal cottage

[0:46:36] Voice 6: and the large property dwelling.

[0:46:40] Voice 3: Seconded.

[0:46:43] Voice 8: Sarah, how are you doing with that?

[0:46:46] Voice 4: So you're proposing that you're proposing on lots

[0:46:52] Voice 4: over 40 hectares that you're not be allowed

[0:46:55] Voice 4: to build a second dwelling?

[0:46:57] Voice 6: They would still be allowed to build a second dwelling

[0:47:00] Voice 6: but it would be subject to the prior conditions

[0:47:02] Voice 6: of any other lot.

[0:47:04] Voice 6: So they just don't get to build very large second dwellings.

[0:47:08] Voice 6: they can build small second for farm use yeah how

[0:47:16] Voice 4: many one

[0:47:17] Voice 6: but they would also have to be for

[0:47:19] Voice 6: farm use so there's no exemption for large properties essentially okay yeah

[0:47:24] Voice 8: and uh was

[0:47:26] Voice 8: there any need to do anything about the uh the campsite situation that did any did you know did

[0:47:33] Voice 8: you want to add anything in there about uh asking for a distinction between temporary worker camping

[0:47:41] Voice 8: versus agritourism? Or do you feel comfortable with where we're at?

[0:47:45] Voice 3: My understanding, and perhaps

[0:47:47] Voice 3: staff can advise here, is that this is a matter of changes to the ALCA and that it's kind of

[0:47:56] Voice 3: beyond our control. It's like we can say whatever we want with provincial regulation rules. So

[0:48:02] Voice 3: perhaps staff can tell us about that.

[0:48:05] Planner Mayes: Yeah, and certainly, you know, I think it's great to have

[0:48:08] Planner Mayes: have Reid here and he can advise us we we couldn't go over and so the limit is 10 which is why the

[0:48:16] Planner Mayes: the changes is being proposed so this is this is a campsite so commercial commercial accommodation

[0:48:21] Planner Mayes: and you know I will note as well some of those proposals is to clean this area up a little bit

[0:48:29] Planner Mayes: because this would limit those commercial guest accommodations in a campground to again

[0:48:35] Planner Mayes: Again, agricultural land classified as a farm under the Assessment Act.

[0:48:38] Planner Mayes: So that's in line with

[0:48:39] Planner Mayes: the ALC regulations, as well as that number, which is 10.

[0:48:45] Voice 5: And I might be throwing another wrench.

[0:48:47] Voice 5: I haven't actually read your bylaw that refers to this.

[0:48:51] Voice 5: But, you know, the provision to allow campsites in the ALR is directly and only linked to

[0:48:57] Voice 5: agritourism accommodation.

[0:48:59] Voice 5: So that stipulation being you can't have the campsite if you don't have the agritourism

[0:49:04] Voice 5: operation um it's not an outright permitted through because there's another section of

[0:49:10] Voice 5: the agricultural use regulation called tourist accommodation and um that doesn't have campgrounds

[0:49:17] Voice 5: or campsites in it so it is directly tied to agritourism so that's an important distinction

[0:49:21] Voice 5: as well um

[0:49:25] Voice 3: i'm i'm still concerned uh i like um and christine mentioned the word commercial

[0:49:31] Voice 3: commercial campground uh to me that implies something different than strictly agritourism

[0:49:38] Voice 3: because we have people who come and camp here they give us money and then they do work too

[0:49:43] Voice 3: you know they're like uh super woofers they they provide both cash income and labor which is part

[0:49:51] Voice 3: of their agritourism now agritourism is kind of narrowly defined as they pay you a bunch of money

[0:49:57] Voice 3: and you lead them around and show them the horses and they pet the horses and stuff,

[0:50:02] Voice 3: then that's a different thing.

[0:50:03] Voice 3: But I would just like to, maybe I'm just flapping my jaws because this is all provincial

[0:50:09] Voice 3: legislation, but I would like to see some ways of exempting bona fide agricultural workers

[0:50:17] Voice 3: from the campground prohibition, because we're probably, this summer, we probably went

[0:50:21] Voice 3: over the 10 limit.

[0:50:22] Voice 3: yeah

[0:50:28] Planner Mayes: and certainly you know this is mirroring that agritourism portion of it and again you

[0:50:34] Planner Mayes: know the commercial guest accommodation you know how that's defined in our land use bylaw and

[0:50:39] Planner Mayes: certainly you know something if if you wish to include that in your um in your recommendation

[0:50:46] Planner Mayes: to the local trust committee to perhaps consider that and and perhaps then they can direct staff

[0:50:54] Planner Mayes: to do some more work on that um topic well

[0:51:00] Voice 3: if i may i'd like to amend um the motion on the table

[0:51:05] Voice 3: that it also include a recommendation that the campground limitation does not apply to bona fide

[0:51:14] Voice 3: agricultural workers to the greatest degree allowed by uh provincial statute all right uh so

[0:51:28] Voice 8: So it sounds like we're at a point now where, Sarah, when you feel like you've got that ready,

[0:51:33] Voice 8: maybe you could read back where we're at so far.

[0:51:36] Voice 9: Hi, Chair Eagle. I could share my screen if that would be helpful.

[0:51:40] Voice 7: Sure thing.

[0:51:41] Voice 9: Okay.

[0:51:54] Voice 4: Okay. Can you see that now?

[0:52:10] Voice 8: All right. I guess I may as well read it out and then we'll take a vote.

[0:52:16] Voice 8: So we're voting on the motion, which is that the Salt Spring Island Agricultural Advisory

[0:52:23] Voice 8: advisory planning commission recommends to the salt spring island local trust committee that

[0:52:27] Voice 8: draft bylaw 526 proceed subject to the following recommendations a that they remove item d which

[0:52:33] Voice 8: is the full-time rental cottage b which is that they remove item f which is the dwelling on a

[0:52:41] Voice 8: on a large a large lot and c that they include a recommendation that the campground limitation does

[0:52:46] Voice 8: does not apply to, I think you said bonafide farm workers.

[0:52:54] Voice 8: I

[0:52:54] Voice 3: said bonafide farm workers, if that's acceptable.

[0:52:58] Voice 9: Yeah.

[0:53:03] Voice 8: So that motion has been moved and seconded.

[0:53:06] Voice 8: I think we're at a point where I would say all in favor

[0:53:10] Voice 8: of proceeding with that motion.

[0:53:14] Voice 9: I would say all in favor, yeah.

[0:53:18] Voice 8: Okay, I think that's it, I think we did it.

[0:53:22] Voice 8: yeah yeah

[0:53:27] Voice 9: that was good all

[0:53:29] Voice 8: right we got there uh that's great okay um thank you for that you guys

[0:53:36] Voice 8: and uh unless there is any other business and i don't think there is i think it's time for a motion

[0:53:41] Voice 8: to adjourn

[0:53:42] Voice 7: sure

[0:53:43] Planner Mayes: sorry i did want to uh let a share a note from our legislative clerk that

[0:53:48] Planner Mayes: chair training is forthcoming as well as new member training so that is uh coming your way

[0:53:53] Planner Mayes: shortly for invitation i

[0:53:55] Voice 8: could i could use it that's good

[0:53:56] Planner Mayes: you did a wonderful

[0:53:58] Planner Mayes: job oh oh yeah

[0:54:00] Voice 3: you're

[0:54:00] Voice 8: too kind you're

[0:54:02] Voice 3: you're great brie don't worry brie you're doing good ah

[0:54:06] Voice 8: you're all too

[0:54:07] Voice 8: nice you're too nice uh a motion to adjourn anyone i'll move

[0:54:11] Voice 9: i

[0:54:14] Voice 8: think we're adjourned

[0:54:15] Voice 7: okay

[0:54:15] Voice 7: thank you thank you guys

[0:54:17] Voice 9: thank you thank you staff for all your good work yeah thank you

[0:54:20] Voice 9: Yeah,

[0:54:21] Planner Mayes: thank you. And thank you, Reed and Doug from the Ministry of Agriculture. Appreciate your presence here.

[0:54:25] Planner Mayes: Thank you.

[0:54:27] Voice 3: You or someone else can continue to be involved. That was great.

[0:54:30] Voice 3: It was helpful.

[0:54:33] Voice 3: Absolutely. Thank you.

Salt Spring Island 
Agricultural Advisory Planning Commission Minutes 
September 16, 2021       ADOPTED Page 1 
 
Salt Spring Island  
Agricultural Advisory Planning 
Commission 
 
Minutes of a Regular Meeting
 
 
 
 
Date of Meeting: Thursday, September 16, 2021 
 
Location:  Electronic Meeting 
 
Members Present:  Bree Eagle, Chair  
  Ken Byron, Commissioner  
 Conrad Pilon, Commissioner  
 Nathan Roberson, Commissioner 
 Jan Steinman, Commissioner 
 
Regrets: Brent Brochu-Ingram, Vice Chair 
 
Absent:  Zack Hemstreet, Commissioner   
    
Staff Present:  Geordie Gordon, Planner 2 
 Kristine Mayes, Planner 1 
 Sarah Shugar, Recorder 
 
Media and Others  Peter Grove, Local Trustee 
Present: Laura Patrick, Local Trustee 
 Reed Bailey, Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) 
 Doug Pepper, Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) 
 
 
 
These minutes follow the order of the agenda although the sequence may have varied. 
 
Chair Eagle called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.   
 
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA  
 
By general consent the agenda was adopted. 
 
2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 
 
2.1  Draft Minutes of the August 12, 2021 AAPC Meeting 
  
By general consent,
 
the minutes of the August 12, 2021 Salt Spring Island Agricultural Advisory 
Planning Commission meeting were adopted. 
 
 
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island 
Agricultural Advisory Planning Commission Minutes 
September 16, 2021       ADOPTED Page 2 
3. BUSINESS ITEMS 
 
3.1 Changes to Residential Permissions in the Agricultural Land Reserve 
 
Planner Gordon and  Planner  Mayes presented  a  memorandum  dated September  1,  2021 
regarding forthcoming Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) changes to residential permissions in 
the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). 
 
In discussion the following comments and questions were noted: 
 There was a question regarding whether draft Bylaw No. 526 is in line with the Provincial 
regulations.  Planner  Gordon  reported  draft  Bylaw  No.  526  is  intended  to  bring  the  Salt 
Spring Island Land Use Bylaw into conformity with forthcoming ALC changes to residential 
permissions in the ALR. 
 Reed Bailey, MoA Representative asked whether staff considered less than the maximum 
permissions that the ALC will allow. Planner Gordon reported 90 square metres is in line 
with other additional residences that have been permitted such as in Bylaw No. 512, a bylaw 
that expanded permissions for full-time rental cottages.  
 There was a comment that the AAPC has been advocating for housing on farmland for a long 
time and that the AAPC should support the new Provincial regulations. 
 Reed Bailey advised that Local Governments are not required to change bylaws to be the 
same as the new Provincial regulations. 
 There was a concern that the increased housing permitted in the new Provincial regulations 
does not need to be used for farm use and that the AAPC has been advocating for housing 
for farmworkers.  
 There was  a  comment  that  the  new  Provincial regulations  permit general  housing  and  a 
developer could build condominiums on farmland. 
 Concern was expressed that the new regulations are being imposed on local governments. 
Planner  Gordon  reported local  governments could be  more  restrictive  than  the  ALC 
permissions. Reed Bailey reported that local governments have authority over residential 
uses on the ALR within their community, within the bounds of the Agricultural Act. 
 Support was expressed for housing to be for the use of the farm.  
 There was a question regarding if staff could comment regarding enforcement of housing for 
farm  use. Planner Gordon  reported that statutory  declarations and/or  covenants may  be 
required as enforcement mechanisms. 
 There was a comment that requiring farm tax status would be a good mechanism to ensure 
that at least $2,500 of farm product is being produced. 
 There  was  a  comment  that  the  Salt  Spring  Island Area  Farm  Plan  recommended  that  a 
property would need to have farm tax status to be permitted to have additional housing. 
 There was a comment that siting is an important consideration for additional housing on 
farmland. 
 There  was  a  concern  that  the  Provincial  regulations  reduce  the  number  of  permitted 
campsites on farmland.  
 There was a comment regarding farmworker housing on non-ALR properties. Planner Mayes 
reported the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee has directed staff to report on options 
to amend Section 3.17 of Salt Spring Island Land Use Bylaw No. 355 to utilize subdivision 
potential for farmworker or long-term housing 

 
 
Salt Spring Island 
Agricultural Advisory Planning Commission Minutes 
September 16, 2021       ADOPTED Page 3 
 There  was  a  question regarding  campsite  regulations  within  the  ALR  and  support  was 
expressed for assurance that farmers will be able to allow camping to supply housing for 
farmworkers. 
 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Agricultural Advisory Planning Commission recommend to the Salt 
Spring Island Local Trust Committee that draft Bylaw No. 526 proceed, subject to the following 
recommendations: 
a. remove Item d) a full-time rental cottage subject to Section 3.15; 
b. remove Item f) on a lot greater than 40 hectares in area, a dwelling unit not exceeding 186 
square metres in floor area; 
c. include  a  recommendation  that  the  campground  limitation  does  not  apply  to  bona  fide 
farmworkers. 
CARRIED 
 
4. OTHER BUSINESS - none 
 
5.     ADJOURNMENT  
  
 By general consent the meeting adjourned at 3:54 p.m. 
 
 
 
 
__________________________________ 
Bree Eagle, Chair 
 
 
CERTIFIED CORRECT: 
 
 
__________________________________ 
Sarah Shugar, Recorder