Denman Island Local Trust Committee community information meeting, February 15, 2022

[0:00:01] Chair Fast: Hello. Okay, now we're streaming and recording. Great. Then I'm going to start the meeting.

[0:00:10] Chair Fast: Can we hear you, Laura? Can I do a little sound check?

[0:00:13] Chair Fast: Can you hear me?

[0:00:14] Chair Fast: Oh, now I can. Good.

[0:00:15] Chair Fast: Okay. I see the lights very

[0:00:17] Trustee Busheikin: intense here, but that's what it's like.

[0:00:20] Chair Fast: Yes. Lucky you. Okay, well,

[0:00:23] Chair Fast: welcome everybody to the meeting of the Denman Island Local Trust

[0:00:30] Chair Fast: Trust Committee. And first, just to start out, I want to acknowledge and respect that

[0:00:34] Chair Fast: we're meeting digitally across the territories of the Coast Salish people, and especially

[0:00:40] Chair Fast: the unceded traditional territory of the Comox Nation. And I'd just like to introduce what

[0:00:47] Chair Fast: we're doing today. This is an electronic meeting. We had to make some changes because of the

[0:00:54] Chair Fast: the COVID situation and so this is a being held on zoom and recorded and live streamed

[0:01:03] Chair Fast: but it's going to be a brief meeting with a limited agenda because we can't have public

[0:01:09] Chair Fast: participation because of the speed that we needed to make the changes in the numbers of staff

[0:01:14] Chair Fast: available to help public participate in this meeting so this is just a short one to cover

[0:01:21] Chair Fast: some time-sensitive agenda items, and so that's what's happening today. So it's live-streamed

[0:01:29] Chair Fast: and recorded, and we've got people with us. I'll just introduce everybody. First off,

[0:01:37] Chair Fast: I'm Sue Ellen Fast, and I'm zooming in to chair the meeting from Nuklelekuem, also called Bowen

[0:01:45] Chair Fast: Island, also called Quelacum, in Howe Sound, part of the northern region of the Islands Trust.

[0:01:51] Chair Fast: And with us today, we've got your two local trustees, Laura Bushekin, who reminds me in her

[0:01:59] Chair Fast: name there that Denman Island is called Teis de Ich. Is that correct?

[0:02:05] Chair Fast: I believe it's actually Teis de Ich.

[0:02:08] Chair Fast: Thank you.

[0:02:09] Chair Fast: Looks quite different even than it looks.

[0:02:12] Chair Fast: I was hoping to get the name of the island out so that helps thank you good morning Laura and

[0:02:18] Chair Fast: we also have trustee David Critchley with us today good morning David good morning everybody

[0:02:25] Trustee Critchley: good

[0:02:26] Chair Fast: this is also a little bit of a sound check here and we've got a number of staff and guests

[0:02:31] Chair Fast: with us today so I'll just do some introductions we've got Sonia Zupanet she's our island planner

[0:02:39] Chair Fast: And she's hosting the meeting. So if she's doing several things in the background, she's running the technology as well as her professional planning expertise, bringing that to the meeting.

[0:02:51] Chair Fast: And we have Vicky Bachman, and she's in the sunlit room there. She's our professional minute taker.

[0:02:59] Chair Fast: So these are some of the staff behind the work of the Islands Trust. Besides your elected trustees, you've got the professional expertise of staff.

[0:03:09] Chair Fast: And we've got Will Cottingham, who's showing up there.

[0:03:13] Chair Fast: She helped us get the meeting going.

[0:03:14] Chair Fast: She's the administrative assistant.

[0:03:16] Chair Fast: So if anybody has any questions about the meeting today

[0:03:19] Chair Fast: or how to participate in future meetings or what's going on,

[0:03:22] Chair Fast: contact W. Cottingham at northinfo.bc.ca.

[0:03:29] Chair Fast: And she'll do a little troubleshooting probably for a few minutes

[0:03:32] Chair Fast: until she has to get called away to other things.

[0:03:34] Chair Fast: um guests i can see on the screen that we've got with us today so far uh ioni smith is um with

[0:03:42] Chair Fast: agricultural upland agricultural consulting so she'll be with us for uh the farm planning

[0:03:48] Chair Fast: regulations part of the agenda and uh we also have um dave ricketts with us today uh for the

[0:03:56] Chair Fast: second part of the agenda with the denman housing association thank you we'll see you soon um and

[0:04:01] Chair Fast: And there may be other guests joining us as well.

[0:04:04] Chair Fast: And meanwhile, then I'm going to call the meeting to order

[0:04:09] Chair Fast: unless I've missed something, I think I've got it.

[0:04:13] Chair Fast: And so I'd like to ask,

[0:04:16] Chair Fast: is there anything we need to add

[0:04:18] Chair Fast: to the agenda today, trustees?

[0:04:20] Chair Fast: Or can we approve the agenda?

[0:04:22] Chair Fast: Go ahead, Laura.

[0:04:24] Chair Fast: Yeah, this isn't something to add

[0:04:26] Chair Fast: or actually it's just

[0:04:27] Trustee Busheikin: a comment that with this,

[0:04:30] Trustee Busheikin: I just wanted to clarify the question of not having a town hall and or delegations because

[0:04:37] Trustee Busheikin: I've had a few inquiries and I mean it's a

[0:04:40] Trustee Busheikin: decision the local trust committee made we

[0:04:42] Trustee Busheikin: are showing the agenda ahead of time and we approve it and but I think it was after that

[0:04:51] Trustee Busheikin: I mean and it's not typically a special meeting is sort of an extra meeting that's perhaps

[0:04:55] Trustee Busheikin: done particularly so we can have a community information meeting or get an extra piece of

[0:05:00] Trustee Busheikin: business done between meetings but this is is more or less replacing our January meeting and

[0:05:05] Trustee Busheikin: um I guess it's I mean if anyone wants to shed light on it I'm not sure the full reason why we

[0:05:12] Trustee Busheikin: ended up not other than that it's the standard practice for special meetings to not have town

[0:05:18] Trustee Busheikin: halls um was there also I guess I want to know a question was there also a technical reason

[0:05:23] Trustee Busheikin: But otherwise, just a comment that I think, especially in these times when certainly I, as a trustee, feel like I'm sometimes working in a bubble of isolation and there are fewer opportunities for community members to interact with the trust and trustees because of COVID, I would like to take any chance we have to enable that.

[0:05:45] Trustee Busheikin: that so it's just a note for sorry my my pets and uh dog pet participate my point i'll try and deal

[0:05:53] Trustee Busheikin: with my pets i don't know if you heard them they're having a little fight yeah um i don't

[0:05:58] Chair Fast: have another

[0:05:58] Trustee Busheikin: place to go where there's good internet um okay sure

[0:06:02] Chair Fast: well back when we had our

[0:06:05] Chair Fast: meeting in uh january um we had a motion to cancel the the january 18th meeting and hold a special

[0:06:13] Chair Fast: meeting this meeting on february 15th and uh the details were in that and i think it's actually in

[0:06:19] Chair Fast: our uh minutes that we're going to pass there um next on the uh on the agenda but partly it's

[0:06:26] Chair Fast: because um of staff limitations we it's really hard for me as a chair to um chair the meeting

[0:06:35] Chair Fast: and uh help everybody feel invited and that they're uh the meeting is going well and staying

[0:06:41] Chair Fast: in the times that we're being efficient and all that kind of thing uh and having good discussion

[0:06:46] Chair Fast: as well as uh helping people with technical problems hook into the um the meeting especially

[0:06:52] Chair Fast: when there's broadband issues of internet connectivity which could also happen at my end

[0:06:58] Chair Fast: or anywhere in the big system um and uh so we hadn't on the agenda

[0:07:04] Chair Fast: it was lined up

[0:07:05] Chair Fast: okay and uh including um people trying to join so and including guests and uh um sometimes uh

[0:07:16] Chair Fast: applicants and people who also need to join and staff so that's uh a limitation is that um i've

[0:07:24] Chair Fast: got lots of confidence when it comes to running technology but i know that i couldn't help people

[0:07:29] Chair Fast: at it remotely and run the meeting and neither should uh planners have to do that maybe maybe

[0:07:36] Chair Fast: sonja could she's very good at lots of things but um to do uh the work that we're here to do we just

[0:07:45] Chair Fast: don't we're not set up yet so with the staff to host uh digital meetings and uh that's something

[0:07:53] Chair Fast: thing we can discuss um at the march trust council meeting when we talk about the budget because

[0:08:00] Chair Fast: with zoom meetings and the pandemic some things have changed so our next meeting will be um march

[0:08:08] Chair Fast: 22nd and hopefully we'll be meeting in person on denman island and that one can be the public

[0:08:14] Chair Fast: participation meeting i'm hoping uh depends on the pandemic situation as far as i know so hopefully

[0:08:21] Chair Fast: that clarifies it okay but we did discuss it uh january the 13th um okay so uh any other

[0:08:32] Chair Fast: changes or comments before we begin uh approval of the agenda then i'm going to uh uh assume that

[0:08:43] Chair Fast: by consent we're approving um the agenda i'll put a check mark beside that and we're moving on to

[0:08:50] Chair Fast: business items so uh thanks everybody we're uh by the way we're supposed to be um um finish this

[0:08:57] Chair Fast: meeting we've got a short meeting 10 till uh noon so i'm hoping we can just keep carry on through

[0:09:03] Chair Fast: but if anybody does need a break let me know and we'll take a quick break um okay so uh 3.1

[0:09:11] Chair Fast: um these are minutes so here's our january 13th minutes for adoption uh any problems with those

[0:09:18] Chair Fast: trustees no no seeing none um i'm going to adopt them by consent and then 3.2 is uh minutes from

[0:09:28] Chair Fast: back in november uh november 2nd for adoption more special meetings because we so i'm seeing

[0:09:36] Chair Fast: a thumbs up any problems with it no oh a thumbs up from david okay so those are um also approved

[0:09:44] Chair Fast: thank you by consent and then we're on to 3.3 denman farming regulations uh review project

[0:09:51] Chair Fast: we're on page 18 of the agenda and uh i'm going to introduce uh or hand the meeting over to

[0:10:01] Chair Fast: sonia where did you go son right here thanks there we go so planner zupanets please

[0:10:07] Planner Zupanec: take it away

[0:10:07] Planner Zupanec: thanks i will be introducing the consultant ioni smith to actually um present this item to you and

[0:10:14] Planner Zupanec: and be the point person for this agenda item.

[0:10:17] Planner Zupanec: And just so you're aware, Marlis McCarver,

[0:10:19] Planner Zupanec: which is the other name on the staff report

[0:10:21] Planner Zupanec: is the actual Island planner who will be supporting

[0:10:24] Planner Zupanec: Ione Smith after today.

[0:10:26] Planner Zupanec: So she's just an orientation meetings

[0:10:29] Planner Zupanec: and I've offered to support the transition period.

[0:10:33] Planner Zupanec: So we have some recommendations

[0:10:35] Planner Zupanec: in the staff report agenda package,

[0:10:38] Planner Zupanec: and I can bring these up after Ione's completed

[0:10:42] Planner Zupanec: did her discussion with you for reference so these are the staff recommendations moving forward so if

[0:10:48] Planner Zupanec: you have any questions either I or Ione can help you but I'll stop sharing my screen so that Ione

[0:10:53] Planner Zupanec: can choose if she would like to share.

[0:11:00] Voice 5: Thanks Sonia yeah I will share my screen I just put

[0:11:04] Voice 5: together a couple of slides here we go so thank you Sonia thank you trustees for inviting me to

[0:11:12] Voice 5: present today. My name is Iona Smith. I'm with Upland Agricultural Consulting and we've been

[0:11:17] Voice 5: brought on to assist with the Demmon Island Farm By-law Review. Just by way of introduction,

[0:11:23] Voice 5: I am here today but I also have two other team members. So myself, I'm a professional agrologist.

[0:11:29] Voice 5: I've been working in the realm of agricultural planning, policy and regulatory development for

[0:11:34] Voice 5: about 12 years. I work with Kaslyn Bonner who's also a professional agrologist, engagement specialist

[0:11:40] Voice 5: specialist, and research analyst. And we have Sydney Henatchik, who is an agroecologist who

[0:11:46] Voice 5: works with us as well. Over the last 12 years, we've completed 70 projects in British Columbia.

[0:11:52] Voice 5: We have extensive experience on Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands. And we were lucky enough to

[0:11:57] Voice 5: be part of the consulting team that worked on the original Denman Island Farm Plan about 10 years

[0:12:03] Voice 5: ago. So we're fairly familiar with the community. Just as a reminder, in terms of the overall

[0:12:09] Voice 5: process. There's a hefty amount of sort of background information and review process that

[0:12:15] Voice 5: happens at our desks. We also have been undertaking some engagement, which I'll get into in a moment

[0:12:21] Voice 5: to try and get a breadth of opportunities for opinions to be shared on the matter. And we will

[0:12:28] Voice 5: be coming to do a community meeting in person later this spring, in addition to the questionnaire,

[0:12:33] Voice 5: which we're presenting today and then once we've done the engagement we will come back with a

[0:12:40] Voice 5: summary report of what we heard and then craft the recommendations for the farm bylaw review itself

[0:12:46] Voice 5: and so the overall timeline is to be completed this fall. In terms of the engagement plan we have

[0:12:54] Voice 5: several pronged approach to try and get as many as many opinions and as much feedback as we can

[0:13:00] Voice 5: as was alluded to earlier in the meeting the COVID situation has certainly thrown a wrench

[0:13:05] Voice 5: to some of our objectives around in-person engagement.

[0:13:08] Voice 5: However, we are going to be attending

[0:13:11] Voice 5: several APC and LTC meetings.

[0:13:13] Voice 5: We've already undertaken the interviews.

[0:13:16] Voice 5: We have a couple more to do,

[0:13:17] Voice 5: but the majority of the interviews

[0:13:19] Voice 5: have already taken place by phone

[0:13:20] Voice 5: and those have been rolling out really, really well.

[0:13:23] Voice 5: We'll be doing two mail-outs.

[0:13:25] Voice 5: So one will involve the questionnaire,

[0:13:27] Voice 5: which we're going to be talking about.

[0:13:29] Voice 5: And the second one will be closer

[0:13:31] Voice 5: to the end of the project.

[0:13:32] Voice 5: And as I mentioned,

[0:13:33] Voice 5: we will be also having a community information meeting later this spring the interviews that

[0:13:40] Voice 5: we've undertaken have included individuals from this list so i had the opportunity to

[0:13:45] Voice 5: chat with trustee bouchakin and we've talked with several members of the growers and producers

[0:13:52] Voice 5: alliance and the advisory planning commission we've already met once with the advisory planning

[0:13:57] Voice 5: commission a couple of weeks ago to run the draft questionnaire by them as well we've also

[0:14:03] Voice 5: so met with individuals from DICES and from Farm to Family Meals on Wheels and several others. So

[0:14:09] Voice 5: I actually think we're going to be exceeding the goal of eight to 10 interviews, I think we'll be

[0:14:13] Voice 5: getting closer to 12 or 15. And these are really, in my opinion, time well spent, because we tend

[0:14:20] Voice 5: to be able to get into some of the deeper dive of considerations and concerns that people might have.

[0:14:26] Voice 5: And we're also able to better explain the jurisdictional differences between what

[0:14:31] Voice 5: island's trust can and can't do in terms of agricultural policy and regulation versus what

[0:14:36] Voice 5: the province can do one of the things that we're really starting to um i guess understand is that

[0:14:42] Voice 5: there's quite a lot of confusion within the community and this isn't just something um that

[0:14:47] Voice 5: is you know found on denman per se i think there is a lot of confusion just province-wide within

[0:14:52] Voice 5: the general population as to who has jurisdiction over what when it comes to agriculture

[0:14:57] Voice 5: culture. So these conversations are definitely time well spent. Part of the purpose for this

[0:15:03] Voice 5: meeting today is to talk about the questionnaire. So we tried to strike a balance between addressing

[0:15:09] Voice 5: topics that seem to have come up quite a bit over the last few years during the initial steps for

[0:15:15] Voice 5: the farm bylaw review process, but also not trying to overwhelm the questionnaire with too much

[0:15:21] Voice 5: information and too many questions. So we're trying to strike the right balance. As you can see, we did

[0:15:25] Voice 5: did include quite a lot of context and preamble and partly that's to address some of those concerns

[0:15:30] Voice 5: that we were hearing from people over a lack of clarity around jurisdictional reach and so we

[0:15:35] Voice 5: tried to provide a bit of that context for folks as well so there are four key topics to the

[0:15:41] Voice 5: questionnaire the first is around definitions and we had a lot of back and forth with the

[0:15:46] Voice 5: growers and producers alliance on some of the wording of this so it's been well informed by

[0:15:50] Voice 5: their members and specifically looking at not only what types of agriculture is allowed in the

[0:15:56] Voice 5: agricultural land reserve which of course is much more provincially focused but what could and

[0:16:00] Voice 5: should agriculture look like on denman island outside of the alr so particularly in these

[0:16:06] Voice 5: residential areas and then we get into this uh the topic of secondary dwelling so as you may know

[0:16:13] Voice 5: the agricultural land commission's uh rules and regulations changed at the beginning of this year

[0:16:18] Voice 5: and now farms or farmland that is already that is in the ALR and that only have one dwelling will

[0:16:26] Voice 5: now be able to have a secondary dwelling without application to the to the ALC and so those

[0:16:32] Voice 5: dwellings must fit certain criteria like they have to be a certain size or less but there will

[0:16:37] Voice 5: be no restrictions as to who can be in them whether it's short-term or long-term rentals

[0:16:42] Voice 5: whether it's family members or farm worker housing and the property doesn't need to have farm tax

[0:16:46] Voice 5: status so that's a fairly big change and local governments have the jurisdiction and the ability

[0:16:52] Voice 5: to be more restrictive than what the ALC has put forth and so what we want to do is we want to

[0:16:57] Voice 5: gauge from the community whether there's a desire for the community to have further restrictions in

[0:17:03] Voice 5: place or if this should just open the door to the development of secondary dwellings in the ALR

[0:17:08] Voice 5: and just by way of analysis we did work with Marnie before she left to look at what that

[0:17:14] Voice 5: would mean in terms of actual numbers of houses and really it would likely be much less than 100.

[0:17:19] Voice 5: So there's already quite a few secondary dwellings in the ALR so those properties would not qualify

[0:17:25] Voice 5: and so when we're talking about you know how many properties would actually kind of fit within this

[0:17:31] Voice 5: description it's about 100 or less and then we would assume that not everybody would go

[0:17:35] Voice 5: for this option because there's obviously costs associated with building a secondary dwelling. So

[0:17:40] Voice 5: So we try to provide some of that context for folks when they're answering the questionnaires

[0:17:44] Voice 5: that they are informed as possible.

[0:17:47] Voice 5: The third issue that we are broaching is tourist accommodation on farmland.

[0:17:53] Voice 5: This is not just agritourism.

[0:17:55] Voice 5: So tourist accommodation can be related to agricultural activities or not.

[0:18:00] Voice 5: Those that are related to agricultural activities is agritourism.

[0:18:03] Voice 5: Those that aren't are bed and breakfast.

[0:18:05] Voice 5: And so the legislation at the provincial level allows for both.

[0:18:09] Voice 5: but again this is one area where local jurisdictions such as the islands trust has the ability to be

[0:18:14] Voice 5: more restrictive so if none of these um none of these uses are mentioned in the zoning bylaw in

[0:18:20] Voice 5: the in the farm bylaw then it by definition they are not considered allowed so up until this point

[0:18:27] Voice 5: these uses have not been allowed on denman island but there has been some interest from some people

[0:18:33] Voice 5: in opening up the conversation to look at when and how

[0:18:37] Voice 5: some of these tourist accommodations might be permitted

[0:18:41] Voice 5: or, I guess, desirable on Denman Island.

[0:18:44] Voice 5: So there's different levels of tourist accommodation

[0:18:49] Voice 5: that could be allowed up into a maximum which the province sets.

[0:18:52] Voice 5: So we've tried to ask some questions within this topic

[0:18:54] Voice 5: to gauge community interest in reaching some of those levels

[0:18:59] Voice 5: or none at all. So staying with the status quo. And then we also within that context talk about

[0:19:06] Voice 5: the use of a temporary use permit as a potential tool. Now I know there's interest from the

[0:19:11] Voice 5: community of also looking at other tools rather than just temporary use permits, but unfortunately

[0:19:16] Voice 5: there just aren't a lot of options when it comes to either allowing something outright or just

[0:19:23] Voice 5: testing the water sort of as a pilot. So the temporary use permit is as close as you can kind

[0:19:28] Voice 5: to get as to you to doing a pilot project when it comes to a permitted use so we've asked some

[0:19:33] Voice 5: questions within that context there and then the last one is is kind of an add-on um there's some

[0:19:39] Voice 5: interest in setbacks and and using setbacks to protect environmentally sensitive areas

[0:19:44] Voice 5: so there's two ways to go about this at the provincial level the agricultural environmental

[0:19:50] Voice 5: management code of practice which is administered through the ministry of environment sets very

[0:19:55] Voice 5: very specific setbacks from certain agricultural uses from any type of water course but then

[0:20:01] Voice 5: there's other agricultural uses that are less intensive so maybe grazing for example where

[0:20:07] Voice 5: setbacks from waterways are encouraged but they're not necessarily regulated to be a certain number

[0:20:12] Voice 5: of meters back that would need to be integrated into a local government's development permit area

[0:20:18] Voice 5: guidelines for environmental protection now I know that development permit areas are outside

[0:20:23] Voice 5: the scope of this review particularly but I thought given the level of conversation within

[0:20:28] Voice 5: the community around potentially adding some restrictions or limitations as to the type of

[0:20:34] Voice 5: agriculture that can happen within the vicinity of waterways that it would be useful to at least

[0:20:39] Voice 5: start asking the question and then this would give further information for staff and elected

[0:20:45] Voice 5: officials to decide whether or not to open this conversation up further during a different phase

[0:20:50] Voice 5: of the work. So that's where we are with the question topics. You'll notice that we haven't

[0:20:56] Voice 5: referenced cannabis. And again, that's also because cannabis is outside of the scope of

[0:21:00] Voice 5: this particular review. But I just wanted to remind everybody that we haven't forgotten about

[0:21:04] Voice 5: it. We've just been told to hold off for now. So that's it. In terms of next steps, we will be

[0:21:13] Voice 5: preparing the mailout once the questionnaire is approved. We are continuing to update the

[0:21:17] Voice 5: agricultural land use inventory that was initially conducted as part of the first farm plan. And we

[0:21:23] Voice 5: will be coming to do the community information meeting in late April or early May. And we'll

[0:21:27] Voice 5: work with staff on finding the best date for that. That's all I've prepared. And I'm happy

[0:21:33] Voice 5: to take any questions.

[0:21:37] Chair Fast: Thank you very much, Ione. And we've got questions coming up. Here

[0:21:42] Chair Fast: comes Trustee Critchley. Go ahead, Trustee.

[0:21:46] Trustee Critchley: Yes, thank you. Thank you, Ione. I appreciate

[0:21:49] Trustee Critchley: Appreciate your presence here and all your experience.

[0:21:52] Trustee Critchley: That's wonderful to have such expertise brought to bear on this topic that's been on the back burner, it seems, for so long.

[0:22:03] Trustee Critchley: So I do look forward to concluding something this year.

[0:22:07] Trustee Critchley: I had a question about the mailouts.

[0:22:10] Trustee Critchley: You mentioned two, and the first one is obviously the questionnaire, which is before us.

[0:22:15] Trustee Critchley: But what is the second mailout that is contemplated?

[0:22:20] Voice 5: So the second mail-out would be closer to the end of the project when we would have our draft set of recommendations.

[0:22:25] Voice 5: And so what we might do is send those out by mail and then also have a very quick online survey or opportunity for people to provide feedback on those.

[0:22:33] Voice 5: Okay.

[0:22:37] Trustee Critchley: Also, is it intended then that the existing draft bylaws that we have prepared form the basis for discussion and amendment, or do you contemplate redrafting new bylaws from afresh?

[0:23:00] Voice 5: I'm thinking it's going to likely be a bit of a hybrid approach.

[0:23:03] Voice 5: So there's components of the bylaws as they are right now that probably don't need to

[0:23:06] Voice 5: be touched at all.

[0:23:07] Voice 5: And then there may be other sections that might need rewriting.

[0:23:10] Voice 5: So we're certainly not going to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[0:23:14] Voice 5: I think a lot of good work was done.

[0:23:15] Voice 5: But certainly with these hot button issues, there needs to be a bit of a rework.

[0:23:19] Voice 5: And that'll really start to depend on what we hear back from the community.

[0:23:23] Voice 5: So it's a bit too early to tell.

[0:23:25] Voice 5: But I certainly don't see a requirement for a full rewrite at this point.

[0:23:29] Voice 5: Okay.

[0:23:33] Trustee Critchley: Chair, I'm not sure whether I should just follow up with a number of questions or

[0:23:38] Trustee Critchley: yield the floor to my colleague here and come back in later.

[0:23:43] Chair Fast: I'm not seeing any urgency from Trustee Boucherkin, so please

[0:23:48] Trustee Busheikin: go ahead, David.

[0:23:49] Chair Fast: Your

[0:23:49] Trustee Busheikin: questions, because you may cover off some of mine.

[0:23:53] Trustee Critchley: Go ahead.

[0:23:54] Trustee Busheikin: Thank

[0:23:54] Trustee Critchley: you. So I would point out that included in the materials was a letter from a resident

[0:24:02] Trustee Critchley: President Harleen Holm, who is a former trustee and has a lot of experience being both a trustee,

[0:24:11] Trustee Critchley: longtime resident, and a farmer. So I am concerned, especially since we don't have

[0:24:19] Trustee Critchley: public participation in this session here, just to bring forward some of her views and her

[0:24:26] Trustee Critchley: your question. So she had set out a number of items in her letter that she thought should be

[0:24:34] Trustee Critchley: included within the materials generally that we our file or our web file that we would have on

[0:24:40] Trustee Critchley: this. And I guess this is more for planners. Is there any problem with having those things

[0:24:48] Trustee Critchley: included? They all seem to me to be to be relevant and useful information to have both for the public

[0:24:55] Trustee Critchley: and for our consultants so the

[0:25:01] Voice 7: question is

[0:25:01] Planner Zupanec: the question is

[0:25:03] Planner Zupanec: can we include that or forward this

[0:25:06] Planner Zupanec: to the consultant or add

[0:25:08] Trustee Critchley: it to the project page

[0:25:10] Trustee Critchley: well yes both i suppose absolutely

[0:25:15] Planner Zupanec: your project

[0:25:16] Planner Zupanec: page is yours to customize as you see fit we put the you know the obvious staff reports and

[0:25:25] Planner Zupanec: supporting documentation for the project because it is sort of a fresh start with this grant funding

[0:25:32] Planner Zupanec: so if there's historic information or sort of archived data that you feel as an LTC is relevant

[0:25:43] Planner Zupanec: and important we can definitely add it as a background to the project on the project website

[0:25:50] Planner Zupanec: which the consultant has full access to and can also reference should they deem that to be

[0:25:55] Planner Zupanec: necessary right

[0:25:59] Trustee Critchley: do you need a motion from us for that or well is that just something that you will

[0:26:05] Trustee Critchley: do now recognizing that it's thought to be important from at least one person here me i

[0:26:13] Planner Zupanec: guess in terms of formality it is up to you to to let me know what you feel is important that needs

[0:26:19] Planner Zupanec: to be included because we may get multiple requests for different things to be included

[0:26:24] Planner Zupanec: that you may or may not feel is necessary

[0:26:28] Planner Zupanec: or they'll be asking staff to do this

[0:26:30] Planner Zupanec: and really it's up to you.

[0:26:32] Planner Zupanec: So if you wanna pass a quick resolution

[0:26:34] Planner Zupanec: to let me know exactly which documents

[0:26:36] Planner Zupanec: you would like included in the project reference

[0:26:38] Planner Zupanec: or background page, I can do that for sure.

[0:26:43] Trustee Critchley: All right, so I'll make a motion then

[0:26:46] Trustee Critchley: that Demenon Local Trust Committee request staff

[0:26:49] Trustee Critchley: to include in the Islands Trust website

[0:26:54] Trustee Critchley: as project documents the items listed in the letter of harleen home dated february 1 2022

[0:27:10] Trustee Critchley: and those are items a through e of that letter thank

[0:27:19] Chair Fast: you do i have a seconder i'm

[0:27:24] Trustee Busheikin: just um you've

[0:27:26] Trustee Busheikin: probably seen me frowning down i'm looking at my uh inbox on my ipad and i'm looking for that letter

[0:27:31] Trustee Busheikin: can you tell me the date again i just want to make sure i

[0:27:35] Trustee Critchley: know what i'm doing the materials

[0:27:37] Trustee Critchley: it's a page 32 of our agenda package okay

[0:27:40] Trustee Busheikin: thank you that's perfect i will get here i just want

[0:27:43] Trustee Busheikin: to make sure i know what these things really are um it's just and i i think it you know the

[0:27:50] Trustee Busheikin: the website if there's too much on it it ceases to fill its purpose that's um there's nothing i

[0:27:57] Trustee Busheikin: I think politically I wouldn't want there.

[0:27:59] Trustee Busheikin: It's more about volume.

[0:28:05] Trustee Busheikin: So

[0:28:05] Chair Fast: would it be okay with you trustees hearing that

[0:28:08] Chair Fast: and agreeing could, if staff choose to put in a folder

[0:28:17] Chair Fast: with like more info or something like that

[0:28:20] Chair Fast: with these additional things,

[0:28:21] Chair Fast: just so people can separate out the current documents

[0:28:24] Chair Fast: documents um for this project now uh compared to um these other documents would that be all right

[0:28:33] Chair Fast: with you yeah

[0:28:36] Trustee Busheikin: like i i'm happy for these to be there but yeah it takes a little bit of management

[0:28:40] Trustee Busheikin: because there's you know there's things going back to 2013 that i think only certain sort of keeners

[0:28:46] Trustee Busheikin: will and then then a report that was part of creating the first farm plan like maybe there

[0:28:52] Trustee Busheikin: There could be a section of farm plan and background documents to the farm plan where

[0:29:00] Trustee Busheikin: A would go and then other related documents might be B and then the, you know, Harleen

[0:29:09] Trustee Busheikin: Holmes objection to the use of Islanders, da, da, da, da, da.

[0:29:14] Trustee Busheikin: I don't know when that was dated.

[0:29:16] Trustee Busheikin: It sounds like it's correspondence.

[0:29:18] Trustee Busheikin: correspondence i mean i don't think we should have correspondence beyond the last

[0:29:22] Trustee Busheikin: five years really um unless it could be with like farm plan supporting documents supporting

[0:29:28] Trustee Busheikin: documents from creating the farm plan so um yeah i mean that's just extra work for staff to sort

[0:29:35] Trustee Busheikin: all that um but i do think um yeah i think we should be highlighting discussion really

[0:29:44] Trustee Busheikin: starting this year primarily for people to read and and documents and everything else it needs to

[0:29:50] Trustee Busheikin: be um people need help if they just arrive there and there's just a big pile of documentation to

[0:29:57] Trustee Busheikin: read it's overwhelming um so

[0:30:00] Chair Fast: I think I'm hearing that you're okay with staff

[0:30:02] Chair Fast: arranging this however they feel is best

[0:30:04] Chair Fast: to present it, the materials.

[0:30:07] Chair Fast: And I'm also hearing that you're not keen

[0:30:10] Chair Fast: on having D included.

[0:30:14] Chair Fast: It's the undated submission.

[0:30:18] Chair Fast: It's a

[0:30:19] Trustee Busheikin: submission from the LTC adoption of the farm plan.

[0:30:27] Trustee Busheikin: So no, I actually think,

[0:30:30] Trustee Busheikin: that she can resubmit it and it can become correspondence,

[0:30:33] Trustee Busheikin: but a lot of things were submitted

[0:30:35] Trustee Busheikin: and there were numerous public meetings

[0:30:40] Trustee Busheikin: that many people had input

[0:30:42] Trustee Busheikin: and I don't think the trust should highlight

[0:30:44] Trustee Busheikin: one person's input, so yeah.

[0:30:50] Chair Fast: So would it be a friendly amendment, Trustee Critchley,

[0:30:54] Chair Fast: if we modified your motion

[0:30:56] Chair Fast: to read one A, B, C, and E to the website?

[0:31:06] Trustee Critchley: Yes, I'm fine with that. But I also think that it is

[0:31:12] Trustee Critchley: useful to have the various thoughtful views that have already been presented. And it seems a little

[0:31:20] Trustee Critchley: bit unnecessary to be asking somebody to resend, you know, the same comments with a more current

[0:31:27] Trustee Critchley: date on it. I don't, not wanting to be directing staff in any minute detail as to how to organize

[0:31:36] Trustee Critchley: this, but surely it could be organized in the way of, you know, general heading of background

[0:31:44] Trustee Critchley: documents, for example, and things that are regarded as more important and given more

[0:31:48] Trustee Critchley: more prominence, and then perhaps a general correspondence file that, as was said, the

[0:31:56] Trustee Critchley: really keen people who want to look into it and find out what their fellow residents are

[0:32:00] Trustee Critchley: saying, they can go to that.

[0:32:03] Trustee Critchley: But yes, it requires some management in terms of the headings and the sort of sub boxes

[0:32:09] Trustee Critchley: that these things are going to appear in.

[0:32:11] Trustee Critchley: But I think they should all be there.

[0:32:14] Trustee Critchley: So with that in mind, I'm open to that suggestion.

[0:32:19] Chair Fast: okay so the friendly amendment is that will uh i

[0:32:23] Trustee Busheikin: haven't seconded it yet

[0:32:24] Chair Fast: so there's nothing to

[0:32:25] Trustee Busheikin: amend

[0:32:25] Chair Fast: i'm sorry i don't think i seconded it no you're right so now the motion reads a b c and e

[0:32:34] Chair Fast: correct yeah right

[0:32:38] Voice 7: okay

[0:32:39] Chair Fast: so do i have a seconder yes i'll second it thank

[0:32:43] Trustee Busheikin: you and um very sorry

[0:32:45] Chair Fast: if

[0:32:45] Trustee Busheikin: I may it just to be very clear it's not that I I'm trying to suppress D but it's already in

[0:32:52] Trustee Busheikin: the record of the LTC adoption of the farm plan which was about 10 years ago and and can be found

[0:33:01] Trustee Busheikin: there and yeah I think that's sufficient thank you very much

[0:33:08] Chair Fast: any more discussion okay so on this

[0:33:12] Chair Fast: motion about staff to include on the it website um i'll call the question all those in favor

[0:33:20] Chair Fast: one

[0:33:20] Voice 7: hi two

[0:33:21] Chair Fast: three hands went out thank you very much this is i'm saying this for vicky

[0:33:25] Chair Fast: or note taker in the background who might not see the hands um thank you okay great and uh

[0:33:33] Chair Fast: who would like to uh have questions for ioni or um sonia or uh where to next i see recommendations

[0:33:42] Chair Fast: in front of us, and the time is now 10.30.

[0:33:46] Chair Fast: Go ahead, Laura Bershaken.

[0:33:48] Trustee Busheikin: Assuming Trustee Chrisley's done.

[0:33:50] Trustee Busheikin: One question, and I just, yeah, I want to thank you, Ione,

[0:33:54] Trustee Busheikin: for all your work.

[0:33:56] Trustee Busheikin: It's been really exciting to read the questionnaire,

[0:33:58] Trustee Busheikin: and it really helped me just refresh my understanding

[0:34:02] Trustee Busheikin: of the issues and understand,

[0:34:05] Trustee Busheikin: and then where our focus has been

[0:34:08] Trustee Busheikin: and is right now with this, so thank you.

[0:34:10] Trustee Busheikin: you um you mentioned that a lot of um alr line already has secondary dwellings and i'm just like

[0:34:16] Trustee Busheikin: i realize you probably can't go into detail because you haven't had the opportunity but

[0:34:21] Trustee Busheikin: like as far as i understand those would be illegal secondary dwellings unless those are

[0:34:26] Trustee Busheikin: big properties that are subdividable and therefore uh permit uh more than one density

[0:34:32] Trustee Busheikin: um so i'm wondering like that information that a lot of alr property already has secondary dwellings

[0:34:38] Trustee Busheikin: if you know anything more about those secondary dwellings yeah

[0:34:43] Voice 5: good question i don't have specific

[0:34:44] Voice 5: numbers that was more in discussion with marnie just general sense of what's gone on on the

[0:34:49] Voice 5: community and my understanding there isn't a building permit requirement necessarily too so

[0:34:54] Voice 5: it's harder to track but just going on what what we know for communities that we do have numbers

[0:34:59] Voice 5: with um for the rest of the gulf islands for example it seems to be fairly common for there

[0:35:04] Voice 5: to be um on many on many of those lots like a secondary dwelling that's not to say that if rules

[0:35:09] Voice 5: were to change through this new bylaw that those would therefore come under some sort of compliance

[0:35:15] Voice 5: and enforcement risk because often what we would do is just recommend that any existing um buildings

[0:35:20] Voice 5: may be grandfathered in for example i know that sometimes um people have concerns about that when

[0:35:26] Voice 5: when bylaws are brought in that they're somehow going to now be in trouble so to speak so there's

[0:35:30] Voice 5: ways of making sure that those concerns are accommodated but to answer your question

[0:35:36] Voice 5: directly i don't have specific numbers on the existing numbers of secondary dwellings

[0:35:41] Chair Fast: thanks thank you um more questions for the uh planners the consultant of the planner go ahead

[0:35:48] Chair Fast: trustee critchley yes

[0:35:51] Trustee Critchley: thank you so um i i wanted to just comment on one thing because we did

[0:35:56] Trustee Critchley: We did receive some correspondence that said, you know, objected to the speed of going ahead with this questionnaire because it was only posted on the website a couple of days back, I suppose, last week.

[0:36:12] Trustee Critchley: I just want to say to that that I don't know that there would be any benefit to further postponing this and having public input on the form of a questionnaire.

[0:36:23] Trustee Critchley: It seems to me that these questionnaires are best handled by people who have expertise in the area.

[0:36:30] Trustee Critchley: And I just as soon get this thing launched and into the public realm for discussion.

[0:36:38] Trustee Critchley: I will say that I find the questionnaire to be unusually complex.

[0:36:45] Trustee Critchley: And I don't mean that by way of a criticism. It's a complex set of questions and issues that we're presenting to the public for response on.

[0:36:56] Trustee Critchley: But just to say that that is, in my view, quite complicated and lengthy for a general questionnaire to the public as a whole.

[0:37:08] Trustee Critchley: I'm wondering from Ioni, if you could tell us a bit, what has been your experience in

[0:37:15] Trustee Critchley: the feedback that you get on questionnaires of this nature, in terms of response rate

[0:37:22] Trustee Critchley: that we might expect?

[0:37:25] Trustee Critchley: Are there other ways that we might do a condensed version for people who are not as keen or

[0:37:32] Trustee Critchley: or just general comments on the concern of the length and complexity of this.

[0:37:39] Voice 5: Sure. And if I can, I'll just also speak to the concern that was raised about the question only being up for a couple of days.

[0:37:46] Voice 5: The questionnaire was developed with direct feedback from the Growers and Producers Association Alliance and feedback from everyone that we interviewed.

[0:37:55] Voice 5: so there has been sort of you know behind the scenes more of an opportunity for that kind of

[0:38:02] Voice 5: level of interaction and informed sort of development of the questionnaire with the

[0:38:10] Voice 5: community yes you're right it is complicated it's a complicated topic we started with a much

[0:38:17] Voice 5: more pared down version and when we tested it out we found that there was still this underlying

[0:38:24] Voice 5: underlying confusion over what is within the realm of jurisdiction of Islands Trust versus the

[0:38:30] Voice 5: Agricultural Land Commission and the provincial government. And so a lot of the preamble and

[0:38:35] Voice 5: context is really geared towards teasing that apart for people so that when they get to the

[0:38:41] Voice 5: questions, they can be as informed as possible. A lot of the concerns, a lot of the kind of

[0:38:46] Voice 5: passionate issues that we were encountering during our engagement were specifically around issues

[0:38:51] Voice 5: that islands just doesn't have any control over and so once we were able to

[0:38:55] Voice 5: explain that to people the temperature of the room started to you know go down

[0:38:59] Voice 5: a bit and people were able to kind of finally understand why we were focusing

[0:39:03] Voice 5: on certain topics over others and so yeah so there's pros and cons what you

[0:39:10] Voice 5: lose when you take away that background context you gain probably in more

[0:39:14] Voice 5: numbers of people providing responses but those responses are less informed so

[0:39:20] Voice 5: So what we're hoping is that people will take the questionnaire.

[0:39:23] Voice 5: They may skim over some of the pretext and the context, but it's there for their reference, at least.

[0:39:29] Voice 5: We will be putting also a version online.

[0:39:31] Voice 5: We can use templates and platforms such as SurveyMonkey where we can hide some of that text.

[0:39:38] Voice 5: And so people can click like more info or context and that that will pop up.

[0:39:43] Voice 5: So that might be another way to accommodate some of those concerns.

[0:39:48] Trustee Critchley: Thank you.

[0:39:50] Trustee Busheikin: Trustee Bishakin?

[0:39:51] Trustee Busheikin: Yeah, I have some commentary on that issue too, but also just a question first that I forgot to ask when I was on the floor.

[0:40:04] Trustee Busheikin: So I just want to get clear on how this will be distributed and then collected.

[0:40:09] Trustee Busheikin: So there'll be a mail-out to every dwelling and there'll be an online version.

[0:40:14] Trustee Busheikin: Then for the mail-outs, how do they get them back to the trust?

[0:40:20] Voice 5: I'll direct that question to Sonia because my understanding is staff are going to be really instrumental in that step.

[0:40:28] Chair Fast: Senator Zupanitz?

[0:40:30] Planner Zupanec: So we can have a drop-off location on island.

[0:40:35] Planner Zupanec: That would be the preferred method.

[0:40:38] Planner Zupanec: And then we would rely on some method.

[0:40:41] Planner Zupanec: Perhaps the trustees could assist in collating and putting that together for submission back to the Northern office.

[0:40:48] Planner Zupanec: So that we can sort out the data entry part. Ideally, we would be focusing on participation electronically. It really does save a lot of time for the data entry. However, we understand a lot of folks really enjoy the tangible paper exercise and we're used to it and we'll deal with it.

[0:41:10] Planner Zupanec: so uh if you want to suggest some appropriate drop-off locations for surveys that we could use

[0:41:19] Planner Zupanec: during covid that are accessible publicly accessible and um that would be really helpful

[0:41:25] Planner Zupanec: because we're sort of limited with what we might be able to set up um we can take direction from

[0:41:31] Planner Zupanec: you on that element and then the electronic surveys are really easy that's not an issue at

[0:41:36] Planner Zupanec: That

[0:41:38] Trustee Busheikin: sounds great. And I think the two natural places are Abraxas Bookstore, they actually have a free post where things are brought back and delivered, but they could set up maybe a special box or envelope for that. And then sometimes the general store also is that I believe, David, the general store is certainly worth asking, because they have longer hours than the bookstore.

[0:41:57] Trustee Busheikin: store and i don't know like i know that you know with the the bookstore they will have some things

[0:42:05] Trustee Busheikin: where you have to give it to the staff and it's behind the counter i don't know if that's a

[0:42:09] Trustee Busheikin: concern if it's like a government survey and we don't want people like i

[0:42:12] Chair Fast: don't think anyone would

[0:42:13] Chair Fast: but you know stealing security

[0:42:16] Trustee Busheikin: people put a

[0:42:18] Chair Fast: lot of people put a lot of time into making yeah we

[0:42:21] Trustee Busheikin: want to make people were taking the most to read

[0:42:23] Chair Fast: them and they didn't get back

[0:42:24] Trustee Busheikin: there might be a way

[0:42:25] Trustee Busheikin: to agree with the staff it's locally owned and family owned and run and perhaps

[0:42:30] Chair Fast: trustees can

[0:42:31] Chair Fast: talk with staff about that after the meeting okay great yeah because

[0:42:37] Trustee Busheikin: i actually if i may like i have

[0:42:39] Trustee Busheikin: i have quite a lot of comments on the survey and and just um uh you know i just want to really get

[0:42:47] Trustee Busheikin: it right both in terms of you know accuracy and making sure we're asking the right things and

[0:42:52] Trustee Busheikin: And also that we're communicating in a way that people are going to find accessible.

[0:42:57] Trustee Busheikin: And I appreciate the complexity.

[0:42:59] Trustee Busheikin: I think it's important to have all that information.

[0:43:01] Trustee Busheikin: Otherwise, the questions are not, like, if someone just answers them sort of off the

[0:43:07] Trustee Busheikin: top of their head, I don't know how useful that is.

[0:43:09] Trustee Busheikin: Like, you do have to understand the context.

[0:43:10] Trustee Busheikin: So I'd like to preserve that.

[0:43:11] Trustee Busheikin: But I have, like, I do have a number of comments stylistically, but also a few technical things

[0:43:17] Trustee Busheikin: and one major content-related thing.

[0:43:19] Trustee Busheikin: um so can i just can you start with the content one sure the content one is um to do with them

[0:43:28] Trustee Busheikin: uh they're fairly new regulations from the alr about a maximum uh dwelling size

[0:43:35] Trustee Busheikin: uh 500 square meters i believe it is i think that came in perhaps a year or two ago but it's

[0:43:43] Trustee Busheikin: certainly not something that was part of the discussion previously and i would like to see

[0:43:48] Trustee Busheikin: look at that. I think that especially if we will be considering loosening restrictions to increase

[0:43:56] Trustee Busheikin: options for secondary dwellings, that is an increase in overall impact and potentially

[0:44:02] Trustee Busheikin: density on the island. And I think in terms of climate change and environmental impact and

[0:44:08] Trustee Busheikin: community impact, if we're increasing human use, we should also look at ways to put some healthy

[0:44:14] Trustee Busheikin: limits around it. And I think 500 square meters is plenty. And I think that a little bit would

[0:44:19] Trustee Busheikin: offset some of the concerns about just the impact of potentially more housing or more

[0:44:26] Trustee Busheikin: tourism infrastructure. So I would like a question about, it could be a very simple question about,

[0:44:34] Trustee Busheikin: you know, would you support aligning Demand's regulations with the ALR

[0:44:40] Trustee Busheikin: our regulation about maximum house size on ALR land

[0:44:44] Trustee Busheikin: of 500 square meters, XXX square feet.

[0:44:48] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:44:49] Voice 5: Can I respond to that?

[0:44:51] Voice 5: Yeah, no, that's fine.

[0:44:52] Voice 5: The only thing with that is that

[0:44:54] Voice 5: the 500 square meter maximum is something

[0:44:57] Voice 5: that the Island's Trust doesn't have wiggle room on.

[0:45:01] Voice 5: You could be more restrictive than that,

[0:45:02] Voice 5: but there is no legal avenue

[0:45:04] Voice 5: to be less restrictive than that.

[0:45:06] Voice 5: So I would wanna manage people's expectations.

[0:45:08] Voice 5: adaptation so okay you have to be in

[0:45:11] Chair Fast: alignment with 500 yeah so you

[0:45:12] Voice 5: can be more restrictive

[0:45:13] Voice 5: but

[0:45:14] Chair Fast: you can't be

[0:45:15] Voice 5: less restrictive that's that's one of the new regulations yeah okay perhaps

[0:45:19] Chair Fast: that's a line to add then um if the trustee who's

[0:45:23] Chair Fast: read it carefully didn't yeah yeah

[0:45:25] Trustee Busheikin: um that's good

[0:45:27] Trustee Busheikin: and then maybe when it cuts down to what our bylaws look like we might want to insert that

[0:45:30] Trustee Busheikin: in our regulations or people aren't gonna gonna know yeah

[0:45:35] Voice 5: like the city of delta they've restricted

[0:45:37] Voice 5: there's to 350 for a primary dwelling and so when they look at secondary dwellings for example

[0:45:43] Voice 5: they make sure that overall it's a 500 max so I

[0:45:46] Trustee Busheikin: think that could be a good approach for Denman

[0:45:50] Trustee Busheikin: and perhaps that could be then added to the question about the possible restrictions for

[0:45:56] Trustee Busheikin: secondary dwellings that the overall square footage doesn't it would take a bit of explanation

[0:46:01] Trustee Busheikin: but i would support

[0:46:03] Trustee Busheikin: adding that as a possible you know you could have a secondary dwelling but you

[0:46:07] Trustee Busheikin: can't overall go above that 500 square meters

[0:46:10] Voice 5: right so right now the criteria is i'm just i'm

[0:46:14] Voice 5: thinking the criteria is that the province won't allow a secondary dwelling if the primary dwelling

[0:46:18] Voice 5: is already over 500 that would eliminate you from being even allowed to yeah yeah

[0:46:24] Trustee Busheikin: but but but um if

[0:46:27] Trustee Busheikin: If the primary dwelling is 499 square meters, they would allow

[0:46:33] Trustee Busheikin: secondary dwelling.

[0:46:34] Trustee Busheikin: And I think what might be interesting

[0:46:36] Trustee Busheikin: for Denman is where the total square footage of

[0:46:39] Trustee Busheikin: secondary and primary dwelling doesn't cross that 500 square meter line.

[0:46:44] Trustee Busheikin: And I would support a question of explaining that right now that we're beholden to that

[0:46:51] Trustee Busheikin: limit of 500 square meters overall, and would community members support tightening that

[0:46:57] Trustee Busheikin: up?

[0:46:57] Trustee Busheikin: Okay. We will get a variety of opinions.

[0:47:01] Trustee Busheikin: Thank you. Okay,

[0:47:03] Chair Fast: next. I'm just noticing you're at 10 to 11. And I just want to make sure that

[0:47:07] Chair Fast: we have time for the affordable housing. Go ahead. Well, I understand. But like,

[0:47:11] Trustee Busheikin: if we have to take a little longer to get this done, so we can get moving, which is why we had

[0:47:15] Trustee Busheikin: this meeting. I hope we can do that. And I will try and be quick. Another thing that's just

[0:47:21] Trustee Busheikin: substantive but small is um there's a mention of a uh denman island farm bylaw we don't have a

[0:47:27] Trustee Busheikin: separate bylaw so uh it needs to say um denman island farming regulations or denman island

[0:47:35] Trustee Busheikin: land use bylaw farming regulations um or maybe alternate between land use bylaw and farming

[0:47:43] Trustee Busheikin: regulations they're just all part of the land use bylaw and then another if i want to prioritize my

[0:47:50] Trustee Busheikin: comments here um there is some information if you go to the section on tourist accommodation

[0:47:58] Trustee Busheikin: that is not um it's not accurate in terms of what's actually in our land use bylaw

[0:48:05] Trustee Busheikin: and um it is that actually if you go to page 25 of the package uh tourism accommodation the alr

[0:48:17] Trustee Busheikin: that says in the first paragraph under the heading at the end that

[0:48:24] Trustee Busheikin: Demini Island Land Use By-law does not currently mention agritourism accommodation or B&Bs and

[0:48:29] Trustee Busheikin: therefore they are currently prohibited. Actually, we have pretty clear mention of B&Bs.

[0:48:38] Trustee Busheikin: They are allowed, they are regulated. It's section 2.4 of the Land Use Bylaw Regulations 15 to 18. It's pages 11 and 12 in the Land Use Bylaw. And they are allowed in all residential zones and in agriculture, forestry, and resource zones.

[0:48:59] Trustee Busheikin: and there's a maximum of three bedrooms with two beds per room okay so um and there's a few other

[0:49:07] Trustee Busheikin: things about them um like they can have kitchen facilities and there's a size maybe there's a

[0:49:13] Trustee Busheikin: size limitation but they're accessory to a to a residential use so there's things around that

[0:49:18] Trustee Busheikin: so that needs to be changed to say that they actually that the bmbs are permitted and then

[0:49:24] Trustee Busheikin: And all the questions about B&Bs need to be changed

[0:49:28] Trustee Busheikin: so that it's the only difference I'm seeing here

[0:49:33] Trustee Busheikin: is between three bedrooms and four bedrooms.

[0:49:35] Trustee Busheikin: Yeah.

[0:49:36] Trustee Busheikin: Okay, thank

[0:49:37] Voice 1: you very much for saying that.

[0:49:38] Trustee Busheikin: Yeah, that would all need to be reflected.

[0:49:42] Trustee Busheikin: And then there's another, I don't know,

[0:49:44] Trustee Busheikin: that I just wanted to bring up

[0:49:48] Trustee Busheikin: that's also substantive and not just stylistic,

[0:49:51] Trustee Busheikin: a question.

[0:49:51] Trustee Busheikin: question um below that there's temporary use permits and you know this is a sort of long-standing

[0:49:57] Trustee Busheikin: question about temporary use permits but i like i've been a trustee 11 years and i was a vice

[0:50:03] Trustee Busheikin: chair and the whole time there was discussion of temporary use permits and what the actual

[0:50:08] Trustee Busheikin: regulations say and if they can be if you can reapply after six years or you can't um and i've

[0:50:17] Trustee Busheikin: heard many different things and i kind of took it upon me to try and get the bottom of that and i

[0:50:20] Trustee Busheikin: I just have to say, I've talked to like our planning director, our CAO, I've been to numerous

[0:50:25] Trustee Busheikin: workshops on secondary housing from the BC, um, uh, LGL, whatever association municipalities and

[0:50:34] Trustee Busheikin: local government association and all of that. And yeah, and I had lawyers and ask them, and I've

[0:50:39] Trustee Busheikin: been told that a temporary use permit, um, while best practices say that they shouldn't be used

[0:50:47] Trustee Busheikin: indefinitely that technically you can just keep applying and keep renewing again and again and

[0:50:53] Trustee Busheikin: again and it's up to the local elected officials to decide if that's okay or not and um rightly or

[0:50:59] Trustee Busheikin: wrongly that is what i've been told legally is is how it is and it is what um uh i think the the

[0:51:08] Trustee Busheikin: community understands uh and it may not be best practices and it may not be something that we

[0:51:14] Trustee Busheikin: end up doing but I feel like because we have temporary use permits now for secondary dwellings

[0:51:20] Trustee Busheikin: and there's only one on the island but I'm quite sure he's planning to reapply after his six years

[0:51:27] Trustee Busheikin: based on his understanding of this and I just don't want to be putting out stuff that isn't

[0:51:33] Trustee Busheikin: entirely true and I know this is a can of worms that we can talk about for ages but maybe there's

[0:51:38] Trustee Busheikin: a way to change this text to just not not be saying things that maybe won't don't align with

[0:51:47] Trustee Busheikin: things we've said before and won't align with practices that we end up doing it could be the

[0:51:52] Trustee Busheikin: language could be changed to say the intention generally is but and the else the other thing

[0:51:57] Trustee Busheikin: that is definitely untrue is that um uh that i mean so the local government can grant full

[0:52:07] Trustee Busheikin: approval through rezoning of the property but on denman there's absolutely nothing in our land use

[0:52:12] Trustee Busheikin: bylaw or our official community plan that would support that quite the contrary so the idea that

[0:52:17] Trustee Busheikin: we would actually be able to grant a rezoning for this secondary dwelling or tourism accommodation

[0:52:25] Trustee Busheikin: is it would take major uh ocp revisions um so i just think that needs to be um reworked okay

[0:52:33] Voice 5: Okay, thank you. I'll make sure that you do that.

[0:52:38] Chair Fast: Thank you very much. I'm going to see if, Trustee Critchley, did you have other content things before we, I know Laura said, okay.

[0:52:46] Chair Fast: And thank you for prioritizing those, Laura. This is great.

[0:52:50] Chair Fast: Yeah, good.

[0:52:51] Chair Fast: So I

[0:52:52] Trustee Busheikin: spent a lot of time partly because I'm so excited about this.

[0:52:55] Trustee Busheikin: I know, it's great stuff.

[0:52:57] Voice 7: And

[0:52:57] Trustee Busheikin: I learned a lot from reading the preamble.

[0:53:00] Trustee Busheikin: Yeah, anyway, it's very helpful.

[0:53:02] Trustee Busheikin: thoughtful and I go ahead and I just want to say I also support that we should get this out like I

[0:53:07] Trustee Busheikin: think that um there's a fear that this is that we're proposing this we're not we're asking what

[0:53:12] Trustee Busheikin: people think about it and we need to know that before we propose anything um so stylistically

[0:53:17] Trustee Busheikin: I also struggle and with the the complexity seeing it's useful seeing it's necessary but also it'll

[0:53:26] Trustee Busheikin: will put people off and there's i guess a couple things um one is that um like i i'm i'm a

[0:53:33] Trustee Busheikin: professional writer i've got plain language training um i'm happy to give this a go over

[0:53:38] Trustee Busheikin: and just for a stylistic plain language edit and try and shorten it and set it up to make it like

[0:53:46] Trustee Busheikin: more kind of punchy and readable it's something i have training in i know it's unusual for elected

[0:53:51] Trustee Busheikin: officials to do that kind of work but if i could get a hold of a word version i could do a track

[0:53:56] Trustee Busheikin: changes suggested edit send it back I only you can do what you want with everything I suggest

[0:54:01] Trustee Busheikin: you don't have to take any suggestions I have no ego attachment um and I could do that over the

[0:54:06] Trustee Busheikin: next couple of days and it would be purely stylistic not political not content wise I

[0:54:10] Trustee Busheikin: think I know the difference um I just see opportunities to make it easier to comprehend

[0:54:17] Trustee Busheikin: and understand just based on my training in in editing and plain language so I would offer that

[0:54:22] Trustee Busheikin: if um okay and

[0:54:24] Trustee Busheikin: can can this be followed up after the meeting this would be so I just want to hear

[0:54:29] Trustee Busheikin: because I want it to be very transparent and I want you know everyone to have a chance to comment

[0:54:34] Trustee Busheikin: because in in theory there's a chance for me to I don't know manipulate the questions and make

[0:54:40] Trustee Busheikin: them leaving questions not that I'm going to do that but I just think transparency is so important

[0:54:44] Trustee Busheikin: oh I totally get why

[0:54:46] Chair Fast: you're uh speaking about it yeah no that's great and that it would be

[0:54:52] Chair Fast: up to the consultant to do the wording I also like what I heard if I can jump in here

[0:54:59] Chair Fast: Iona you mentioned that in the online survey you could make the text smaller it could look more

[0:55:07] Chair Fast: concise and be easier for some people to use because they could just pop the button open

[0:55:12] Chair Fast: when they needed more info and then pop it closed again and just so people would have there

[0:55:18] Chair Fast: there would be a couple of styles going depending on which method people use.

[0:55:23] Chair Fast: So that sounds good to me as well in terms of user experience.

[0:55:29] Chair Fast: Any more, Laura? Oh, I see Trustee Critchley's hand. Go ahead.

[0:55:36] Trustee Critchley: Well, all I'm wondering about is how we proceed now,

[0:55:38] Trustee Critchley: because our first recommendation is that we endorse this document as presented.

[0:55:45] Trustee Critchley: And clearly we won't be endorsing it as presented.

[0:55:49] Trustee Critchley: but can we endorse it in general subject to our discussion I'm seeing Sonya

[0:56:02] Chair Fast: nodding so yes I think we can okay

[0:56:07] Voice 7: in general so yeah okay are

[0:56:17] Chair Fast: we ready to

[0:56:17] Chair Fast: make some motions notes

[0:56:21] Trustee Busheikin: to make sure there isn't anything that should be

[0:56:26] Trustee Busheikin: discussed by the committee um and

[0:56:33] Voice 7: um yes yeah

[0:56:43] Trustee Busheikin: i mean i have there's a couple questions i probably

[0:56:46] Trustee Busheikin: should bring up that should be discussed and understood by everyone if i may i think two

[0:56:51] Trustee Busheikin: questions go ahead laura page 22 question two the last option is prefer not to define horticulture

[0:56:59] Trustee Busheikin: at all and i know for me as a trustee i i think i understand what the implications of that are

[0:57:07] Trustee Busheikin: but i don't think even i understand it completely and i think um that that needs to be i hate to say

[0:57:16] Trustee Busheikin: it a bit of an explanation like why would it matter would it um is there any reason to define

[0:57:24] Trustee Busheikin: define horticulture separately or not? And, um, yeah, I think even now I'm thinking I would need

[0:57:32] Trustee Busheikin: to, I would need an explanation of what that, what that actually, like, cause I think for

[0:57:38] Trustee Busheikin: an Islander, it's all about what am I allowed to do or not? What are my neighbors allowed to do

[0:57:44] Trustee Busheikin: or not? What are other people allowed to do or not? And so any question has to kind of always

[0:57:49] Trustee Busheikin: be understood in that. And that is the problem with the definition questions. Although I think

[0:57:53] Trustee Busheikin: it's explained generally really well um and then um Laura did you have a specific

[0:58:03] Trustee Busheikin: suggestion there the suggestion is to add an explanation of the implications

[0:58:10] Trustee Busheikin: I don't know that well enough to suggest that thank you um and I am just looking I think

[0:58:23] Trustee Busheikin: everything else is really stylistic so yeah i'm happy to go

[0:58:32] Chair Fast: ahead okay thank you very much then

[0:58:35] Chair Fast: uh david did you have a motion prepared there um

[0:58:40] Trustee Critchley: well i can wing it on the fly here so i'll move

[0:58:44] Trustee Critchley: then that the demini local trust committee uh generally endorses the denman island farming

[0:58:51] Trustee Critchley: regulation community questionnaire dated February 2022, subject to the points

[0:59:06] Trustee Critchley: discussed at the meeting.

[0:59:10] Chair Fast: Okay, thank you. I'm seeing Laura nodding. Laura, is

[0:59:15] Chair Fast: that a second? Thank you. So we have a motion moved and seconded. And any more

[0:59:20] Chair Fast: discussion great discussion by the way okay well thank you uh let's vote call the question all

[0:59:27] Chair Fast: those in favor aye aye aye

[0:59:30] Chair Fast: thank you that's three hands went up for the minute taker uh that motion

[0:59:35] Chair Fast: passes um the next one laura would you like to sure

[0:59:40] Trustee Busheikin: i move that denman island local trust trust

[0:59:42] Trustee Busheikin: committee release up to two thousand dollars from the farming regulation review project budget

[0:59:46] Trustee Busheikin: advertising and direct mail out of the country mayor denman island residents and property

[0:59:51] Trustee Busheikin: Thank

[0:59:52] Chair Fast: you. Do I have a seconder? Very

[0:59:54] Chair Fast: good. Yes. Any discussion? Call the question.

[1:00:00] Chair Fast: All those in favor?

[1:00:02] Voice 7: Aye.

[1:00:02] Voice 7: Aye,

[1:00:03] Chair Fast: that passes unanimously.

[1:00:04] Chair Fast: Thank you very much, everybody.

[1:00:06] Chair Fast: And number three, who'd like to

[1:00:09] Trustee Critchley: move this motion?

[1:00:11] Trustee Critchley: I'll move the Damanon Local Trust Committee direct staff

[1:00:14] Trustee Critchley: to work with the consultant to schedule

[1:00:16] Trustee Critchley: and advertise a special meeting

[1:00:18] Trustee Critchley: to hold a community information meeting in the spring

[1:00:20] Trustee Critchley: for the farming regulations review project.

[1:00:23] Chair Fast: Okay, second.

[1:00:25] Chair Fast: Thank you, motion moved and seconded.

[1:00:27] Chair Fast: Any more discussion?

[1:00:29] Chair Fast: Call the question, all

[1:00:30] Chair Fast: those in favor?

[1:00:30] Chair Fast: aye aye

[1:00:32] Voice 7: aye

[1:00:33] Chair Fast: thank you that passes unanimously thank you very much trustees is there anything

[1:00:37] Chair Fast: else that questions outstanding or motions that people want to make or can we move on

[1:00:43] Chair Fast: very good on to affordable housing thank you very much Ioni thanks everybody looking forward to it

[1:00:50] Chair Fast: okay bye thank you okay we're going to move on now um to 3.3 on the agenda so this is the beginning

[1:00:59] Chair Fast: whoops sorry 3.4 this is beginning of the denman housing association and uh page 34 is where we

[1:01:06] Chair Fast: begin so i'm going to um scroll scroll scroll and um i'd like to uh ask sonja to lead off there

[1:01:16] Chair Fast: so please take it away planners upanets i'm

[1:01:21] Planner Zupanec: just going to check to see there was another member

[1:01:29] Voice 7: I see we've got two guests with us.

[1:01:32] Voice 7: Correct.

[1:01:34] Voice 4: Michael, I'm not sure which...

[1:01:36] Voice 4: I'm not Michael.

[1:01:38] Voice 4: I don't know why it's come up as Michael.

[1:01:39] Planner Zupanec: Oh, hi, Henning.

[1:01:40] Planner Zupanec: I didn't recognize you.

[1:01:41] Planner Zupanec: You can change your name.

[1:01:43] Planner Zupanec: Sorry about that.

[1:01:44] Planner Zupanec: I was like, should I admit this person?

[1:01:46] Planner Zupanec: I don't know who it is.

[1:01:48] Planner Zupanec: Okay.

[1:01:49] Planner Zupanec: So can we

[1:01:50] Planner Zupanec: introduce...

[1:01:51] Planner Zupanec: Who is Michael?

[1:01:53] Planner Zupanec: We have Henning Nielsen is the owner of the properties

[1:01:57] Planner Zupanec: for the receiving of the affordable housing to be transferred to DHA,

[1:02:02] Planner Zupanec: the Denman Housing Association, as well as the receiver parcels on Daines Road.

[1:02:07] Planner Zupanec: And Dave Ricketts is a board member with the Denman Housing Association.

[1:02:11] Planner Zupanec: And Simon Palmer is unavailable today.

[1:02:15] Chair Fast: Okay. Thank you.

[1:02:17] Chair Fast: So would you like to introduce the project,

[1:02:20] Chair Fast: or are you going to hand it over to one of the applicants to speak?

[1:02:22] Planner Zupanec: No, not yet.

[1:02:23] Planner Zupanec: No, I think it makes more sense to go through some of the elements

[1:02:26] Planner Zupanec: of the staff report first.

[1:02:29] Planner Zupanec: If I can focus your attention predominantly, it'll be on the attachment one, which is the table, in order to work through whether or not you endorse those changes.

[1:02:39] Planner Zupanec: And then we'll come back to the staff report recommendations, which are more formal wording of those particular changes.

[1:02:47] Planner Zupanec: changes and then I will be giving you a heads up that I have been in contact and in discussion

[1:02:54] Planner Zupanec: with Henning Nielsen about the designation and the zoning of the receiver parcels on Daines Road

[1:03:00] Planner Zupanec: and so I will be it's not within the staff report discussion around potential changes for the

[1:03:08] Planner Zupanec: designation and the zoning of those lands as per his request so I'd like to leave a bit of time to

[1:03:14] Planner Zupanec: discuss that for you today as well so that you can decide whether or not um you wish to direct staff

[1:03:20] Planner Zupanec: to to make some additional changes to bring back at a later date so if i can focus you on this first

[1:03:27] Planner Zupanec: that'd be great so i think due to time i really want to keep it succinct but i want to leave lots

[1:03:36] Planner Zupanec: of time for any questions that you have um the purpose of this report is to make sure that you're

[1:03:42] Planner Zupanec: are aware of the suggested changes in rationale to the bylaw 242 which is the land use bylaw and

[1:03:51] Planner Zupanec: 243 the housing agreement for the denman green application and as i said we're summarizing all

[1:04:00] Planner Zupanec: those recommended changes in attachment one which i'll just click on now so that it's easier for you

[1:04:06] Planner Zupanec: to see oh wrong attachment one there we go so this is the summary of the changes that are

[1:04:14] Planner Zupanec: suggested in the recommendations of the staff report how the staff report goes through a summary

[1:04:21] Planner Zupanec: of the referral responses that we've received the referral period is technically closed for the

[1:04:29] Planner Zupanec: bylaws but it's we're still open to receiving that obviously because a public hearing hasn't

[1:04:34] Planner Zupanec: been scheduled and so up until the close of the hearing any referral responses that come in will

[1:04:39] Planner Zupanec: be available to you to review and consider as we move forward so i provided a summary of those

[1:04:45] Planner Zupanec: referral responses and we can go through any questions that you have about that but i won't

[1:04:50] Planner Zupanec: verbally do that now so that we can go straight to the amendments that need to be discussed so

[1:04:57] Planner Zupanec: So for bylaw number 242, which is the table one and attachment one, the applicant has

[1:05:04] Planner Zupanec: indicated general support for maximum flexibility for the receiver parcel for Denman Green.

[1:05:13] Planner Zupanec: And that is primarily driven by the new site plan, which is figure three in the staff report.

[1:05:21] Planner Zupanec: And I'll skip to that here.

[1:05:24] Planner Zupanec: here so this is a relatively recently delineated professionally delineated wetland area on the

[1:05:33] Planner Zupanec: receiver parcel so the previous rendition of the site plan that was presented to you

[1:05:38] Planner Zupanec: in a previous staff report would no longer be feasible based on this this new information

[1:05:46] Planner Zupanec: so that means that the zoning and the proposed zoning that we've prepared is likely not flexible

[1:05:54] Planner Zupanec: enough to support redevelopment of this site in the future and so when we're drafting zoning and

[1:06:01] Planner Zupanec: creating these zones there's some element of restrictions in line with community input and

[1:06:07] Planner Zupanec: rationale within the OCP but in this case we are recommending maximum flexibility because there may

[1:06:14] Planner Zupanec: be other additional constraints at the time of construction that we can't foresee at this time

[1:06:21] Planner Zupanec: So the changes, we can talk more about the wetland itself later on when we discuss the restrictive covenant.

[1:06:29] Planner Zupanec: But for the purposes of the bylaw 242, which is the land use bylaw, I'm going

[1:06:36] Voice 7: to skip to items D.

[1:06:49] Planner Zupanec: So it's suggested that we reduce the required minimum setback in the R4-1 zone,

[1:06:56] Planner Zupanec: which is the site-specific zone for the Denman housing parcel from the 10 meters which is the

[1:07:03] Planner Zupanec: general setback currently established to four meters for all the buildings and structures

[1:07:09] Planner Zupanec: other than any freestanding photovoltaic solar array setups from the exterior lot lines and

[1:07:17] Planner Zupanec: three meters from the interior lot lines so the four meter exterior is consistent with the MOTI

[1:07:25] Planner Zupanec: OTE, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure setback

[1:07:29] Planner Zupanec: where anything less than four meters,

[1:07:31] Planner Zupanec: you require a special permit for them as well.

[1:07:34] Planner Zupanec: So the applicants amenable to these two setbacks,

[1:07:38] Planner Zupanec: which would then inform the revised site plan

[1:07:41] Planner Zupanec: that they're currently working on with their architect.

[1:07:43] Planner Zupanec: So today is also about giving the applicants some assurances

[1:07:47] Planner Zupanec: that the LTC is supportive of this flexibility

[1:07:50] Planner Zupanec: or added flexibility so that they can prepare

[1:07:53] Planner Zupanec: that next version of the site plan for you to review and the other piece to that is reducing

[1:08:00] Planner Zupanec: the parking requirement the minimum parking requirement to one space per unit versus what's

[1:08:07] Planner Zupanec: currently in the proposed bylaw is 1.5 and the rationale for that again is to at bare minimum

[1:08:15] Planner Zupanec: the land use bylaw would set this requirement the applicant and bc housing in the future

[1:08:20] Planner Zupanec: could of course add additional parking spaces but they would have to meet that minimum for the

[1:08:26] Planner Zupanec: purposes of the siting and use permit and then functionally if they've got the room and they've

[1:08:31] Planner Zupanec: got the flexibility for the spaces to be increased they could do that there's no limits there but

[1:08:39] Planner Zupanec: this would allow for a more creative layout to focus on the dwellings the sewage and access and

[1:08:50] Planner Zupanec: egress to the site as well and so that's uh for the denman housing portion itself so are there

[1:09:00] Planner Zupanec: any before i move on are there any questions about the increased flexibility that's recommended

[1:09:05] Planner Zupanec: for the r for one zone specifically before i move on trustee um

[1:09:12] Trustee Busheikin: so um the um i'm looking at c

[1:09:18] Trustee Busheikin: c table one c um i mean and this is a i feel

[1:09:24] Chair Fast: like a oh can

[1:09:26] Voice 7: i can i

[1:09:26] Chair Fast: just that's no this one

[1:09:28] Chair Fast: this would be d i think isn't that correct planners i

[1:09:31] Planner Zupanec: haven't i haven't um summarized

[1:09:33] Planner Zupanec: a b and c yet okay yeah

[1:09:36] Trustee Busheikin: i'm jumping ahead um so so then e um just with the parking um

[1:09:42] Trustee Busheikin: You know, the idea of having fewer cars is great, and I hope that's how this deals with that. My only concern is that it would lead to lots of parking on Northwest Road, which I think is primarily an aesthetic and maybe a bit of a traffic issue when there's events and people use the area on Kirk and Northwest.

[1:10:03] Trustee Busheikin: west like is there some way to work with moti to maybe actually create some parking stalls on kirk

[1:10:12] Trustee Busheikin: road for maybe um uh what's like side by side parking rather than parallel parking or um

[1:10:20] Trustee Busheikin: yeah just is there anything we can do or ask for to minimize the chance of just a lot of parking

[1:10:26] Trustee Busheikin: always sitting there on particularly on north are

[1:10:30] Planner Zupanec: you referring to parking from other land uses

[1:10:34] Planner Zupanec: or for this

[1:10:35] Trustee Busheikin: no i'm thinking of um residents who have more than one vehicle and need a place for it

[1:10:41] Trustee Busheikin: yeah

[1:10:42] Planner Zupanec: so the denman land use bylaw doesn't permit parking within a highway area for that particular

[1:10:53] Planner Zupanec: adjacent land use so that would need to be something that would need to be reviewed and i

[1:10:58] Planner Zupanec: would need to look into to see what modi's specific requirements are they clearly have

[1:11:03] Planner Zupanec: they don't permit you know backing up into the highway right away that type of parking

[1:11:10] Planner Zupanec: so ideally the site is able to accommodate the vehicles the number of vehicles for each unit

[1:11:20] Planner Zupanec: however we set the minimum requirement and this is where the ltc has flexibility to determine

[1:11:26] Planner Zupanec: determine whether or not it's reasonable for this particular development to be limited and to then

[1:11:33] Planner Zupanec: determine whether or not that influences options for tenants where they have to find parking

[1:11:39] Planner Zupanec: elsewhere and it may not be adjacent to that site it might be that they need to find parking in a

[1:11:44] Planner Zupanec: different location so these are the types of land use issues that of course we want to try to avoid

[1:11:49] Planner Zupanec: conflict and prevent problems with but at the same time you have almost half of the property right

[1:11:56] Planner Zupanec: now not being able to be utilized for typical residential multi-family development and since

[1:12:04] Planner Zupanec: it's such a unique case that it does lend itself well to having restrictions on parking and

[1:12:10] Planner Zupanec: influencing tenancy options around whether or not people can have multiple vehicles parked in close

[1:12:18] Planner Zupanec: proximity or in a convenient location so modi may not be very flexible with what they permit

[1:12:25] Planner Zupanec: it for um especially during a rezoning application um in terms of decisions because it's clearly

[1:12:34] Planner Zupanec: something that they the local government needs to consider is how to deal with the parking on the

[1:12:40] Planner Zupanec: lot and um street parking is pretty common in that part of denman uh within the right of way as it is

[1:12:48] Planner Zupanec: right now there seems to be an informal pattern of use and it already contravenes the general

[1:12:57] Planner Zupanec: approach of not being able to you shouldn't be backing into traffic to to get out of your parking

[1:13:04] Planner Zupanec: spot but uh that's the nature of of how denman has set up the village right now so we might not

[1:13:13] Planner Zupanec: want to be encouraging perpetuating that when we know that that's actually likely going to be

[1:13:18] Planner Zupanec: problematic if you are adding more vehicles.

[1:13:22] Voice 7: Trustee Critchley?

[1:13:24] Trustee Critchley: Thank you. Yes, I think Trustee Breshekin raises an excellent point there that while I'm

[1:13:31] Trustee Critchley: generally disposed towards this request, you know, as a matter of wanting to see this succeed in some

[1:13:42] Trustee Critchley: form, I am very concerned about that. And I think what she is predicting is probably a good guess

[1:13:50] Trustee Critchley: that a number of residents are going to be parking and using parking spots that are normally going to be used by people from using the community halls, one or both of the community halls.

[1:14:03] Trustee Critchley: I'm wondering if, and if I understood Planner Zupanets correctly, did you say that there is actually a clear policy from the Ministry of Highways against having parking which would involve backing out directly onto the roadway?

[1:14:28] Trustee Critchley: Did I understand that right?

[1:14:29] Trustee Critchley: Right.

[1:14:30] Planner Zupanec: The land use bylaw has a regulation related to that in the parking section as well.

[1:14:37] Planner Zupanec: And that's that's a direct link to the Ministry of Transportation general practice that they wouldn't be approving parking,

[1:14:44] Planner Zupanec: permanent parking or designated parking in that manner because it's deemed to be a safety hazard.

[1:14:51] Trustee Critchley: OK. Yeah, that's what I thought. I mean, I'm more concerned about their regulation because we can't change that.

[1:14:57] Trustee Critchley: that we can change our own regulations, I suppose.

[1:15:03] Trustee Critchley: But of course that it's ironic because I mean,

[1:15:08] Trustee Critchley: so much of the parking in the village area

[1:15:11] Trustee Critchley: is actually of that form and it is quite bad.

[1:15:15] Trustee Critchley: I'm wondering if, is it, can we ask the applicant

[1:15:22] Trustee Critchley: to look into the possibility of obtaining

[1:15:25] Trustee Critchley: some additional land from the property next door which is used as a marshalling area for

[1:15:31] Trustee Critchley: for the highways contractor for storage of materials and so forth i mean it seems like

[1:15:38] Trustee Critchley: a parking area would be would be sort of a compatible use with that or what would do what

[1:15:45] Trustee Critchley: does the planner say off the top of your head to that sort of thing your

[1:15:48] Planner Zupanec: land use bylaw already

[1:15:49] Planner Zupanec: contemplates that option is that parking can be provided on a site within 100 meters i think it's

[1:15:55] Planner Zupanec: what the wording is right now so that's always an option there's nothing preventing that and that

[1:16:00] Planner Zupanec: would further support a site-specific zone that has a very limited parking option associated with

[1:16:07] Planner Zupanec: it so denman housing association may decide that that's something that they wish to explore

[1:16:14] Planner Zupanec: based on the site plan that they haven't yet completed so there is a

[1:16:20] Planner Zupanec: there is a chance that if you're not comfortable with the 1.5 meter parking requirement being

[1:16:28] Planner Zupanec: reduced that you defer that decision and ask the applicant to amend their site plan based on

[1:16:33] Planner Zupanec: the current proposed parking and then if they're unable to allocate sufficient parking they could

[1:16:43] Planner Zupanec: come back and we could request you to reconsider and they may in that time also be able to discuss

[1:16:49] Planner Zupanec: alternative options in the village core for additional parking at that time so you if you

[1:16:55] Planner Zupanec: don't feel comfortable today to do that perhaps that's a piece that could come back after they

[1:17:01] Planner Zupanec: attempted the

[1:17:03] Chair Fast: site plan if i can um jump in here i'm i'm not from denman and i'm not that familiar

[1:17:10] Chair Fast: um but it seems uh to me that the priority would be building affordable housing and i'm wondering

[1:17:17] Chair Fast: um rather than parking and i'm um wondering how many of the proposed uh residents would have

[1:17:25] Chair Fast: one and a half to two vehicles um when the location is right down there near the ferry and the

[1:17:34] Chair Fast: um uh and the village and maybe this is a question for um i don't know who wants to answer this it

[1:17:42] Chair Fast: It just seems to me to be the priority would be giving the applicant society more options

[1:17:54] Chair Fast: for developing the housing than the parking is secondary.

[1:17:59] Planner Zupanec: That is definitely the rationale for recommending this reduction.

[1:18:05] Planner Zupanec: However, we understand the land use conflicts very well after something's been built that

[1:18:10] Planner Zupanec: everybody wishes that that was was dealt with more succinctly so okay

[1:18:14] Chair Fast: thank you uh um i i don't want

[1:18:16] Chair Fast: to open a can of worms but uh trust um maybe i'll ask uh i saw the applicant do you have a quick

[1:18:25] Chair Fast: comment dave uh

[1:18:27] Voice 2: yeah i think you're quite accurate in why we're recommending the uh the decrease in

[1:18:32] Voice 2: the parking um and i just wanted to add a comment with respect to accessing parking on an adjacent

[1:18:38] Voice 2: site biggest problem I would have with that or the obstacle I see there is that we've just extended

[1:18:44] Voice 2: the project timeline by a year or two um you know that's a pretty major change okay thank you yeah

[1:18:54] Voice 2: thank

[1:18:54] Chair Fast: you trustee beshaken yeah I just

[1:18:57] Trustee Busheikin: wanted to clarify this isn't a deal breaker like I'm not

[1:19:00] Trustee Busheikin: feeling like I would want to go down in history as someone who blocked an affordable housing project

[1:19:06] Trustee Busheikin: because of parking but I do think it is our it's our responsibility and if there

[1:19:15] Trustee Busheikin: there is a way to look at the problem that is a problem ahead of time and look for solutions.

[1:19:22] Trustee Busheikin: Even what I learned today, clarifying that resident parking is not permitted on a highway

[1:19:28] Trustee Busheikin: is important. Hang

[1:19:30] Chair Fast: on, hang on, Laura. Laura, we're having trouble hearing you. So if you could,

[1:19:35] Chair Fast: okay,

[1:19:36] Trustee Busheikin: is this better? Yes. Okay. Yeah, my mic is kind of funny. So yeah, as I said, I don't want

[1:19:43] Trustee Busheikin: to like I wouldn't say no affordable housing because of parking issues I don't think that

[1:19:49] Trustee Busheikin: that's not what I'm saying I'm saying let's have a look at this up front because having affordable

[1:19:53] Trustee Busheikin: housing that is a continual hassle for the community because the parking isn't a good thing

[1:19:58] Trustee Busheikin: because it's a there's danger and it doesn't bode well for the next affordable housing project

[1:20:03] Trustee Busheikin: they're gonna say well that last one has created a terrible situation um I just would like to know

[1:20:08] Trustee Busheikin: I know that I guess it's a nudge to the applicant to look for solutions.

[1:20:16] Trustee Busheikin: It may be something much less formal with a neighboring property, or it may be talking to Moti about getting some side-by-side parking rather than parallel parking somewhere along Kirk Road.

[1:20:31] Trustee Busheikin: It could be highlighting the limitations on parking on a highway so that everyone knows that.

[1:20:39] Trustee Busheikin: um i just think it's really important to get ahead of it and i i i understand your point

[1:20:44] Trustee Busheikin: trust me fast about will people have cars but it's on denman it's pretty hard for a like a

[1:20:50] Trustee Busheikin: two adult family often they need two cars like you can take the ferry but then you're just in

[1:20:56] Trustee Busheikin: buckley bay yeah and we have a terrible bus service over there and you can't go do your

[1:21:00] Trustee Busheikin: errands and take your kids to classes and while the other part i've tried it myself and i've seen

[1:21:05] Trustee Busheikin: seen other people try the one car solution and i okay this

[1:21:07] Trustee Busheikin: is thank you for it but i think i i want

[1:21:10] Trustee Busheikin: us to take this seriously and and see if the applicant can do some work on it but i wouldn't

[1:21:14] Trustee Busheikin: hold it up and i wouldn't vote against the recommendation but i need i think we need to

[1:21:19] Trustee Busheikin: talk about it

[1:21:20] Chair Fast: okay and i'm uh we've spent 20 minutes on the first little bit of the staff

[1:21:26] Chair Fast: report and uh so i'm if you're if i'm hearing this isn't something that you'd vote against

[1:21:31] Chair Fast: because of this i'm wondering uh is everybody okay if we ask sonia to move on or okay sonia

[1:21:40] Chair Fast: uh david go ahead oh sorry go ahead then sonia okay

[1:21:48] Planner Zupanec: so anyway there's options there that's what

[1:21:51] Planner Zupanec: um d and e are looking for is maximum flexibility there so i'm just going to jump up to c i'm kind

[1:21:57] Planner Zupanec: of working backwards here just because of the properties we're talking about so c is a

[1:22:01] Planner Zupanec: recommendation specifically for the receiver lots on danes road and this is the draft come set back

[1:22:10] Planner Zupanec: to the covenant boundary on the adjacent property uh that was inserted in the draft that got first

[1:22:17] Planner Zupanec: reading uh the applicant or the owner in this case which is here today to help um answer any

[1:22:25] Planner Zupanec: questions that you have about this is asking for those receiver lots to not be encumbered

[1:22:31] Planner Zupanec: any further than what was done originally with setting the boundaries of the covenant area. So

[1:22:37] Planner Zupanec: there was extensive work done to establish the covenant area in order to protect the water

[1:22:44] Planner Zupanec: features. And in that case, any additional restrictions would be deemed unnecessary at

[1:22:50] Planner Zupanec: this time because the covenants in fact do that work. So the owners asked for this particular

[1:22:57] Planner Zupanec: particular piece of the bylaw to be removed, that there not be a 30 meter setback to the covenant

[1:23:05] Planner Zupanec: boundary along the bottom of the slope. If there's any questions about that, we can deal with this

[1:23:11] Planner Zupanec: one now, and then I'll move on to the next piece.

[1:23:14] Chair Fast: Questions for the planner? Go ahead,

[1:23:16] Chair Fast: Trustee Boucherkin. Oh, sorry, Trustee Critchley, maybe I'll start with Trustee Critchley this time.

[1:23:20] Chair Fast: go ahead yeah

[1:23:24] Trustee Critchley: thank you so this this runs directly contrary I think to the

[1:23:31] Trustee Critchley: recommendations of the Dem and Conservancy Association if I'm correct

[1:23:35] Trustee Critchley: on that is is there some some other step that we could take or you have mentioned

[1:23:46] Trustee Critchley: mentioned that the applicant is looking at a different designation and zoning. Does that

[1:23:55] Trustee Critchley: enter into this question at all?

[1:23:58] Planner Zupanec: No, it doesn't. Not at all. So that's why we're dealing with this

[1:24:01] Planner Zupanec: one now because it doesn't matter based on the designation or the zoning change. This was a site

[1:24:08] Planner Zupanec: specific zone setback put in as an additional measure to create sort of a natural buffer area

[1:24:16] Planner Zupanec: where no buildings or structures would be sited when you're drafting new zoning that's an

[1:24:21] Planner Zupanec: opportunity to really be more restrictive and forward thinking that way however the owner who

[1:24:28] Planner Zupanec: is who is ready to speak to this has indicated that the work that went into creating those covenant

[1:24:33] Planner Zupanec: areas already is the buffer for those water features and that the transfer of density to

[1:24:41] Planner Zupanec: these locations should parallel the zoning the base zoning that we'll be talking about

[1:24:48] Planner Zupanec: in a little bit but the the residential zoning that would be in place versus additional

[1:24:54] Planner Zupanec: restrictions that don't typically show up in in other residential zones that wouldn't have the

[1:25:01] Planner Zupanec: the covenants correct or that do have covenants that still don't have that type of a restriction

[1:25:07] Planner Zupanec: um so yeah i would encourage you to to you know if you want to take a minute to hear from the

[1:25:13] Planner Zupanec: owner on this case uh before moving

[1:25:16] Voice 7: on to the

[1:25:17] Planner Zupanec: next item um please go ahead

[1:25:19] Trustee Critchley: i would because i think

[1:25:21] Trustee Critchley: it's an important matter yeah okay

[1:25:24] Chair Fast: so that's henning nielsen is that you that's i okay just

[1:25:29] Chair Fast: Just making it clear for the picture, which says Michael,

[1:25:31] Chair Fast: but you're Henning Nielsen, the owner.

[1:25:34] Chair Fast: Thank you, go ahead.

[1:25:34] Voice 4: Yeah, well, I can be Michael for a day if that works.

[1:25:41] Voice 4: I suppose you all know that I was heavily involved

[1:25:45] Voice 4: with the previous number of land use changes

[1:25:50] Voice 4: that occurred on Denman,

[1:25:52] Voice 4: which resulted in all told 2,000 acres

[1:25:57] Voice 4: acres being put under conservation and protection and park.

[1:26:01] Voice 4: Through that process, we worked extensively with the Conservancy Association, who had

[1:26:10] Voice 4: a lawsuit against the previous owner, which we settled as part of the purchase of the

[1:26:19] Voice 4: land.

[1:26:21] Voice 4: It resulted in 80 acres, no, 160 acres being donated to the DCA, plus two very large covenant areas being placed, one on the Comas Bluffs and then one on the railway-grade marsh system, which is the one that is adjoining here.

[1:26:46] Voice 4: The DCA set the boundaries and for history and information, we spent about three quarters of a million dollars on scientific studies, geotech, groundwater, agriculture, biology, ecology, climatology, you name it,

[1:27:12] Voice 4: to establish which lands were suited for human settlements

[1:27:18] Voice 4: and which lands were informing us that they needed our protection.

[1:27:25] Voice 4: So while I'm sympathetic to the conservation cause, as you can see,

[1:27:37] Voice 4: I think at this point, the DCA is making a recommendation

[1:27:44] Voice 4: that is, I don't want to be critical,

[1:27:50] Voice 4: but it's a bit of an overreach for what they do.

[1:27:53] Voice 4: And it's completely not necessary in this case,

[1:27:57] Voice 4: also because of the topography.

[1:28:01] Voice 4: The setback, the covenant area goes all the way to the base of a slope.

[1:28:08] Voice 4: Dane's Ridge runs on the northeast side of the of the property of the southwestern property line of this parcel.

[1:28:16] Voice 4: And there is about 40 foot drop from the top of the of the ridge down to the base of the or to the start of the covenant to the actual property line.

[1:28:31] Voice 4: So from a practical point of view, even though this is not a steep slope, there is no reason from a human settlement point of view to want to do anything on the slope other than ensure that the largest asset of enjoyment of these lots apart from the nature is the view.

[1:28:53] Voice 4: These lots view, these locations look over the provincial park and to the Beaufort, the line of

[1:29:02] Voice 4: the Beaufort range in the back and to do anything that would take that away is kind of counter

[1:29:07] Voice 4: intuitive to why you'd want to live there in in the first place. If you impose a 30 meter setback

[1:29:14] Voice 4: um you will bring any house site on the back side of uh of the bridge and uh basically devalue from

[1:29:24] Voice 4: a from an enjoyment point of view and a real estate point of view devalue the uh the attractiveness of

[1:29:30] Voice 4: the of the properties uh so that's i think kind of the practical point of view from the other the

[1:29:38] Voice 4: The other thing that I'm looking at from an engagement point of view and why we're working with the DHA to create this opportunity for affordable housing is that being an important part of this, I will not really think it would be fair to...

[1:30:00] Voice 4: penalize um our initiative thank

[1:30:03] Chair Fast: you very much you're

[1:30:05] Voice 4: welcome okay

[1:30:07] Chair Fast: and uh i'm seeing we're at

[1:30:09] Chair Fast: 11 30 i'm just flagging the time because we have limited time today and uh so um questions for the

[1:30:16] Chair Fast: planner trustees or the applicant trustee was shaken or their owner i mean um

[1:30:24] Trustee Busheikin: and and thank

[1:30:25] Trustee Busheikin: you henning for that and it's important to understand that the work that went into the

[1:30:29] Trustee Busheikin: the the covenant could you could you speak into this thank you i will meaning okay so i'm i am

[1:30:36] Trustee Busheikin: not an environmental scientist so this is a question and for staff because i think you have

[1:30:41] Trustee Busheikin: the most expertise here in overview um in order to um uh support uh a setback here like i would

[1:30:52] Trustee Busheikin: need some solid evidence-based science to suggest that this was going to make a really big difference

[1:30:59] Trustee Busheikin: to the futures already being protected by the covenant like i don't have that but we i also we

[1:31:06] Trustee Busheikin: are all about protecting the environment uh is there something you're aware of that needs

[1:31:12] Trustee Busheikin: protection or where the protection in the covenant isn't sufficient um you know where there's some

[1:31:19] Trustee Busheikin: environmental signs behind it that we should be considering thanks for that question

[1:31:24] Planner Zupanec: so just so

[1:31:26] Planner Zupanec: So you're aware of the draft zone that was given or the draft provision that was given first reading was not based on science either.

[1:31:33] Planner Zupanec: The 30 meter was a conservative precautionary buffer for a new zone in an area with recognized sensitive features and habitats that are already protected by a covenant.

[1:31:49] Planner Zupanec: We totally understood that piece, but that it could inform the reduction of intensity of uses within a buffer to the covenant.

[1:31:59] Planner Zupanec: We like those transition zones, which is, you know, a theoretical, practical, scientific term between uses and especially ecological and residential uses.

[1:32:12] Planner Zupanec: We want that transition zone.

[1:32:13] Planner Zupanec: And so we often hear in our training, you know, 15 to 30 meter transition zones seem to be more effective and sort of set a precedent for how to coexist and recognize those features and functions.

[1:32:28] Planner Zupanec: But it's not a scientific case or setback recommendation.

[1:32:31] Planner Zupanec: recommendation and so when the owner contacted us to confirm that this element of the bylaw was

[1:32:39] Planner Zupanec: not something that they agreed to and had not been aware that had already had first reading

[1:32:45] Planner Zupanec: we sort of reconsidered and looked at the baseline reports for those covenant areas

[1:32:52] Planner Zupanec: and we're you know recommending obviously that you consider removing that from the

[1:32:58] Planner Zupanec: the bylaws so that this application in its entirety,

[1:33:03] Planner Zupanec: because these aren't specific elements

[1:33:06] Planner Zupanec: that you are putting forward,

[1:33:08] Planner Zupanec: it is still one application that has to be successful

[1:33:12] Planner Zupanec: and every piece of it has to be successful for it to work.

[1:33:16] Planner Zupanec: And that's where my recommendation is,

[1:33:19] Planner Zupanec: is that if this is a problematic piece for a receiver parcel,

[1:33:24] Planner Zupanec: which is directly linked to the success

[1:33:26] Planner Zupanec: of the Denman Housing site's options to be developed,

[1:33:30] Planner Zupanec: then I would say that this needs to be removed

[1:33:34] Planner Zupanec: because it may infringe

[1:33:35] Planner Zupanec: on the Denman Housing Association's success

[1:33:39] Planner Zupanec: in developing the other site.

[1:33:42] Planner Zupanec: So it's a give and take,

[1:33:44] Planner Zupanec: and those covenant areas were put in place

[1:33:48] Planner Zupanec: with the rigor and the scientific expertise

[1:33:50] Planner Zupanec: to ensure that significant sections

[1:33:53] Planner Zupanec: actions were, you know, under the covenant for those protection benefits. And we're going to

[1:34:00] Planner Zupanec: have to rely on the zoning setback for the, you know, the R zone, whichever one it'll be,

[1:34:06] Planner Zupanec: which we'll talk about later, to ensure that that's sufficient on that slope. But because

[1:34:13] Planner Zupanec: it lends itself well in terms of the topography, there is limited options for development along

[1:34:18] Planner Zupanec: along the buffer because of the topography in that location.

[1:34:23] Planner Zupanec: But we often see that, you know,

[1:34:25] Planner Zupanec: that doesn't really matter for some folks,

[1:34:26] Planner Zupanec: but in this case, yeah,

[1:34:29] Planner Zupanec: the request is to remove that from the provision.

[1:34:34] Planner Zupanec: Thank you.

[1:34:35] Chair Fast: Any follow-up questions?

[1:34:37] Chair Fast: Go ahead, Trustee Critchley.

[1:34:39] Trustee Critchley: Yes, I still have concern about this

[1:34:42] Trustee Critchley: because of the standard practice of not withstanding

[1:34:46] Trustee Critchley: that there is a covenant area

[1:34:48] Trustee Critchley: that the normal practice would be

[1:34:51] Trustee Critchley: to have a setback requirement from a covenant area.

[1:34:56] Trustee Critchley: It's not unusual.

[1:34:57] Trustee Critchley: It seems to be then what I'm getting

[1:34:59] Trustee Critchley: is this is the normal thing.

[1:35:01] Trustee Critchley: So if we are to divert from the normal,

[1:35:06] Trustee Critchley: it seems to me I need some convincing of that.

[1:35:09] Trustee Critchley: And yes, the practical point

[1:35:13] Trustee Critchley: of not wanting to stymie an affordable housing project

[1:35:17] Trustee Critchley: that the community badly needs is an important one,

[1:35:20] Trustee Critchley: but still we have an obligation

[1:35:21] Trustee Critchley: to protect the environment here.

[1:35:23] Trustee Critchley: And as we say, tritely,

[1:35:25] Trustee Critchley: you have to be more careful with an island.

[1:35:27] Trustee Critchley: So I'm concerned that I don't have enough information here

[1:35:30] Trustee Critchley: with this, I'm not seeing,

[1:35:32] Trustee Critchley: we have a nice report on the affordable housing

[1:35:37] Trustee Critchley: with a great biologists report.

[1:35:41] Trustee Critchley: And I think very frankly setting out

[1:35:43] Trustee Critchley: the environmental values there and the concerns of a substantial part of the property. But we

[1:35:49] Trustee Critchley: don't have that for this particular thing. We're asked to rely on that there was some

[1:35:56] Trustee Critchley: due diligence applied when the covenant area was originally established. So I feel like I need

[1:36:04] Trustee Critchley: some better report on this from an environmental point of view, and maybe even looking at the

[1:36:12] Trustee Critchley: property myself to see. I mean, is that an unreasonable thing to do, to actually

[1:36:17] Trustee Critchley: see what the issue is here? I just don't have a good feeling for it. And I'm very loathe to

[1:36:23] Trustee Critchley: say, yeah, let's just kick this off, even though the Denman Conservancy, which is recognized

[1:36:30] Trustee Critchley: and responsible, is against it.

[1:36:33] Planner Zupanec: Just to clarify, the Denman Conservancy is supportive of that

[1:36:38] Planner Zupanec: that element, they had not recommended the setback.

[1:36:40] Planner Zupanec: They were supportive of it.

[1:36:41] Planner Zupanec: So that was a staff recommendation

[1:36:43] Planner Zupanec: for the original setback as a transition zone.

[1:36:47] Planner Zupanec: It does not exist on Denman anywhere else.

[1:36:49] Planner Zupanec: So we were introducing it as a first start of like,

[1:36:53] Planner Zupanec: okay, you finally have a chance to create zoning

[1:36:55] Planner Zupanec: that maybe reflects and is in line

[1:36:57] Planner Zupanec: with more modern planning practices to create these buffers.

[1:37:01] Planner Zupanec: But you don't currently have any of this type

[1:37:03] Planner Zupanec: of setback restriction anywhere else on Denman

[1:37:06] Planner Zupanec: and the conservancy work did not initiate it just to be clear on that piece but they are in support

[1:37:10] Planner Zupanec: of it um and so the residential zoning would be literally it could be 10 meter uh you know in the

[1:37:17] Planner Zupanec: zone itself you would likely have a 10 meter setback if uh you proceed with an r2 zone which

[1:37:22] Planner Zupanec: we'll talk about later um from that setback and i'll just check in with pending on whether or not

[1:37:28] Planner Zupanec: that was what the original intent was that it be maintained as a 10 meter setback in that location

[1:37:33] Planner Zupanec: Just for context, in terms of how much, it's not a zero meter setback that's being requested.

[1:37:38] Planner Zupanec: I would assume it would have been 10 meters.

[1:37:42] Chair Fast: I'm seeing the owner nodding.

[1:37:44] Chair Fast: Go ahead, Henning.

[1:37:47] Voice 4: Yeah, owner and co-applicant.

[1:37:51] Voice 4: So the Danes Ridge was subdivided a year ago.

[1:37:58] Voice 4: as part of that subdivision process a environmental assessment was requested

[1:38:06] Voice 4: because there is a slight overlap of a rar area development permit area along that boundary that

[1:38:17] Voice 4: we talk about and so there is on file with the islands trust an environmental assessment by

[1:38:24] Voice 4: current environmental that addresses um the um the issues that that are here there was nothing

[1:38:33] Voice 4: flagged of any importance um but there was the usual recommendations which would be to make sure

[1:38:42] Voice 4: that all drainage from construction be led away from the um from the covenant area from the

[1:38:49] Voice 4: southwestern boundary and sort of normal good practices from that and um in terms of setback

[1:38:56] Voice 4: uh for for building um uh if you i don't know if you know but most of the ridge on denman the

[1:39:05] Voice 4: western ridge and denman is about 34 to 36 37 degree slope which is a natural angle of repose

[1:39:13] Voice 4: moves from the ridge.

[1:39:17] Voice 4: And so we have about a 40 foot or what's 40 feet.

[1:39:22] Voice 4: It's 12 meters or something like that in vertical.

[1:39:30] Voice 4: And in one to two slow,

[1:39:33] Voice 4: we're probably looking then at what 24 meters

[1:39:37] Voice 4: or something like that of practical setback

[1:39:41] Voice 4: simply from topography.

[1:39:42] Voice 4: and where it would be desirable to put a dwelling and further likely because you'd like to have some open space in front of it.

[1:39:51] Voice 4: I'm a residential designer and builder as well.

[1:39:55] Voice 4: So you'd want to take advantage of what the site gives you.

[1:40:00] Voice 4: And the site is not informing you to make any incursions into this.

[1:40:06] Voice 4: One of the things that I understand that some members of the Lands Committee at the DCA is concerned about is that owners will actually access the provincial park from their property line.

[1:40:24] Voice 4: And they want to restrict that in some manner.

[1:40:30] Voice 4: manner um so uh i think that if we're creating protected places for our enjoyment and so on

[1:40:38] Voice 4: to want to um vilify humans and make sure they don't go there i think it's important for us to

[1:40:46] Voice 4: have humans go and learn how important it is that we have nature and and with knowledge comes the

[1:40:54] Voice 4: desire to protect it and so anyway okay

[1:40:59] Chair Fast: thank you very much you can either

[1:41:00] Voice 4: i can forward um a copy

[1:41:02] Voice 4: of the environmental um uh current environmental um assessment or or sonia may be able to achieve

[1:41:09] Voice 4: uh access that from the recent subdivision application well actually it was an application

[1:41:14] Voice 4: for a development permit because um that was the um the request from from the trust

[1:41:21] Chair Fast: Very good. And I'm seeing Planner Zupanet nodding. So if we wanted to defer this part until you could have a look at that, then now would be a good time to bring that up.

[1:41:36] Chair Fast: Or I'm looking at the time. It's 20 minutes left in our scheduled meeting. And we have a number of detailed motions that could move this project forward.

[1:41:49] Chair Fast: word so um what's the um shall we move on let's let Sonia do the next part of the report while

[1:41:58] Chair Fast: you think okay

[1:42:00] Planner Zupanec: there's no further questions about the covenant setback then I'll summarize

[1:42:05] Planner Zupanec: the next change okay so I am on item b in attachment one table one and that relates

[1:42:19] Planner Zupanec: to the prohibition of the secondary suites for the donor land so this is the wood and road property

[1:42:25] Planner Zupanec: in that zone provision there was a the density transfer would have reduced the the maximum

[1:42:34] Planner Zupanec: build out and on further reflection that wasn't really the intention to penalize the remaining

[1:42:42] Planner Zupanec: density on the donor land from being permitted the secondary suites which would be adding to

[1:42:48] Planner Zupanec: the rental stock of housing on denman island so staff are suggesting that that be amended at this

[1:42:53] Planner Zupanec: point in time so that the r27 site-specific zone for the woodham donor parcel the remaining

[1:43:02] Planner Zupanec: dwellings if they were to be developed could also include a secondary suite are there any questions

[1:43:08] Planner Zupanec: about that element?

[1:43:11] Voice 7: No.

[1:43:12] Planner Zupanec: Okay, and then the item A in that same bylaw

[1:43:16] Planner Zupanec: would be a mirror of those regulations.

[1:43:19] Planner Zupanec: So the densities that are transferred from Woodham

[1:43:23] Planner Zupanec: to Danes Road would also permit a secondary suite

[1:43:29] Planner Zupanec: within the principal dwelling of a site-specific zone.

[1:43:33] Planner Zupanec: And I'm not referencing the R15 zone

[1:43:36] Planner Zupanec: because the applicant or the co-applicant owner

[1:43:38] Planner Zupanec: owner is also requesting a change to the site-specific zone for Daines Road. But in this

[1:43:43] Planner Zupanec: case, in principle, if regardless of what you do with that piece, the secondary suite provision

[1:43:50] Planner Zupanec: would still be permitted on the Daines Road receiver parcels. Are there any questions

[1:43:56] Planner Zupanec: about how that would work out in terms of density and maximum build-out for the receiver parcels?

[1:44:05] Chair Fast: I'm not seeing any hands. No, no, I'm seeing shaking heads. So please go on.

[1:44:10] Chair Fast: Okay, so

[1:44:11] Planner Zupanec: I'm going to go to the second table, table two. And this is specific to the Denman Green Housing Agreement bylaw 243.

[1:44:23] Planner Zupanec: And they've requested one minor change to clause section B, clause 4, specifically outlines the form of housing that is to be constructed to be duplexes, triflexes, or quadruplexes.

[1:44:45] Planner Zupanec: quadruplexes um and so we're recommending that that um clause be removed so that again at the

[1:44:58] Planner Zupanec: time of funding approval and architectural redesign of the site plan based on the funding

[1:45:06] Planner Zupanec: approval that there be maximum flexibility for a configuration that works without contravening

[1:45:14] Planner Zupanec: a clause in the housing agreement um so the form and character would be left to the point in time

[1:45:22] Planner Zupanec: in which funding is basically approved at this point in time the regulations would still stipulate

[1:45:26] Planner Zupanec: a maximum height lot coverage setbacks but not the form of the housing itself so this is a

[1:45:35] Planner Zupanec: attempt to add a little bit more flexibility to it and if there's any questions about that

[1:45:40] Planner Zupanec: the applicant can also speak to that as well since this was applicant initiated

[1:45:47] Chair Fast: any questions for the planner or the trustee i'm not seeing any okay okay

[1:45:54] Planner Zupanec: so the recommendations

[1:45:57] Planner Zupanec: on on page one of the staff report then page 34 yeah that you see again with the farm plan i keep

[1:46:04] Planner Zupanec: jumping back to the farm plan oh sorry

[1:46:06] Planner Zupanec: such a small agenda and i still can't keep it straight

[1:46:11] Planner Zupanec: um so recommendation uh one there is is related to what we just discussed um as well as

[1:46:22] Planner Zupanec: recommendations two and three i am recommending first reading as amended for bylaw 242 the land

[1:46:29] Planner Zupanec: use bylaw and second reading for the housing agreement and that's simply in terms of

[1:46:35] Planner Zupanec: administrative clarity is that we're not anticipating a lot of changes to the housing

[1:46:39] Planner Zupanec: And so it can be given the subsequent reading because we know we're not really going to be coming back and asking you for many changes.

[1:46:48] Planner Zupanec: And it is an administrative bylaw so it's not subject to the public input piece.

[1:46:53] Planner Zupanec: Whereas for bylaw 242, the land use bylaw amendments, we know that there might be some additional changes up until the time of a public hearing or post public hearing, and that you're still waiting for additional information.

[1:47:07] Planner Zupanec: and the Island's Trust Policy Statement Checklist

[1:47:10] Planner Zupanec: based on the water license conditions.

[1:47:13] Planner Zupanec: So that's why we're just keeping it

[1:47:15] Planner Zupanec: at first rating as amended.

[1:47:18] Planner Zupanec: And then I will discuss recommendation five

[1:47:22] Planner Zupanec: before I get into the final piece

[1:47:25] Planner Zupanec: around the Danes Road Parcels Rezoning Redesignation

[1:47:29] Planner Zupanec: because this is in your report.

[1:47:31] Planner Zupanec: So we're suggesting that we should be working

[1:47:34] Planner Zupanec: with the applicant a little bit closer

[1:47:36] Planner Zupanec: to review the wording in the restrictive covenant and propose some additional restrictions so the

[1:47:43] Planner Zupanec: restrictive covenant will be just for the denman housing association piece for the affordable

[1:47:47] Planner Zupanec: housing property and you have seen the draft covenant you have not formally endorsed it yet

[1:47:53] Planner Zupanec: which is fine because we sort of contemplated some more possible tweaking prior to a public hearing

[1:47:59] Planner Zupanec: and this is exactly where we're at now with the new delineated wetland area it's critical that

[1:48:06] Planner Zupanec: the restrictive covenant references that site plan and the recommendations in the professional report

[1:48:12] Planner Zupanec: that are attachment three of this package to ensure that at the time of construction so at

[1:48:20] Planner Zupanec: the time that a siting and use permit is applied for that those recommendations and those elements

[1:48:25] Planner Zupanec: are all adhered to that way we don't have to use the zoning to try to create some messy clunky

[1:48:32] Planner Zupanec: key regulations, we can use that restrictive covenant, which is a little bit of a more

[1:48:38] Planner Zupanec: fulsome tool because we can attach the site plan. We can attach the professional report

[1:48:45] Planner Zupanec: and create the necessary vegetative buffer or any fencing requirements and leave it to that

[1:48:52] Planner Zupanec: point in time that the land alterations are actually going to occur. So I would like the

[1:49:00] Planner Zupanec: the opportunity to do that work with the applicant,

[1:49:03] Planner Zupanec: make sure the board, the DHA board is on board

[1:49:07] Planner Zupanec: before we bring that back to you for review.

[1:49:12] Planner Zupanec: And that's not something we can do on the fly

[1:49:14] Planner Zupanec: and it will take a little bit of time to do.

[1:49:16] Planner Zupanec: So if you're amenable to that,

[1:49:18] Planner Zupanec: that's what recommendation five is specific to,

[1:49:22] Planner Zupanec: as well as stormwater management and drainage,

[1:49:26] Planner Zupanec: which is part of the sort of site development piece

[1:49:30] Planner Zupanec: It will lend itself well to once funding is approved and they have an actual plan, they will know that the restrictive covenant is going to require that plan to be submitted.

[1:49:40] Planner Zupanec: So their layout will be informed by a comprehensive stormwater management plan that has to adhere to any recommendations in that professional report.

[1:49:51] Planner Zupanec: So that's a good time to do that work versus asking them to do any sort of stormwater management report.

[1:49:57] Planner Zupanec: At this point in time, when site plan hasn't been formalized,

[1:50:01] Planner Zupanec: the likely the funding is going to influence the layout or the form and character.

[1:50:06] Planner Zupanec: Parking hasn't been determined.

[1:50:08] Planner Zupanec: So it's all too early to ask for that information before a public hearing.

[1:50:15] Planner Zupanec: It would be best that at the time of a public hearing,

[1:50:18] Planner Zupanec: if the public's concerned about the lack of information related to this wetland area,

[1:50:26] Planner Zupanec: that's what the covenant's for.

[1:50:27] Planner Zupanec: for. So it's a really great tool to be able to capture these pieces at the time that construction

[1:50:33] Planner Zupanec: is actually more feasible versus at the rezoning stage when we're still talking hypothetical

[1:50:38] Planner Zupanec: situations. So I think I've categorized and clarified the recommendations in the report.

[1:50:45] Planner Zupanec: If there's any questions about that, I think this would be a good time to take them before I

[1:50:50] Planner Zupanec: switch gears a little bit and possibly introduce

[1:50:54] Chair Fast: something new. So any questions for the planner?

[1:50:58] Chair Fast: Trustee Critchley.

[1:51:01] Trustee Critchley: Thank you.

[1:51:01] Trustee Critchley: It just occurs to me this might be appropriate time

[1:51:04] Trustee Critchley: to bring up a question that was raised by Mr. Ricketts

[1:51:07] Trustee Critchley: for the applicant.

[1:51:10] Trustee Critchley: He's now on the line,

[1:51:12] Trustee Critchley: but he had asked specifically in an email

[1:51:17] Trustee Critchley: that the local trust committee request

[1:51:21] Trustee Critchley: that William Shulbaugh and Sonia Zipanek

[1:51:24] Trustee Critchley: communicate directly with DHA's engineers

[1:51:27] Trustee Critchley: to reconcile those aspects of the water plan

[1:51:29] Trustee Critchley: mentioned in his response to bring a resolution to issues etc etc is there

[1:51:36] Trustee Critchley: any need for any formality on that or is that something that staff will do so

[1:51:43] Planner Zupanec: from my end no I wouldn't be engaging with any of the engineers or finding out

[1:51:48] Planner Zupanec: any more information unless you are requesting that clarity to be brought to

[1:51:53] Planner Zupanec: you because my role right now is to wait for the provincial approvals with the

[1:52:00] Planner Zupanec: the water license, review those conditions with our freshwater specialist and provide you with

[1:52:06] Planner Zupanec: some recommendations based on that. And if you felt that what you needed was a more comprehensive

[1:52:16] Planner Zupanec: approach or required a staff person to have consultation with an applicant's engineers or

[1:52:26] Planner Zupanec: contractors um that's completely different i don't require that i don't think that the

[1:52:32] Planner Zupanec: freshwater specialists would say that they require that either at this point in time

[1:52:36] Planner Zupanec: they're providing cursory comments to you based on the information that they had which was the

[1:52:42] Planner Zupanec: water plan and you are not being asked to do anything with that at this point in time anyway

[1:52:49] Planner Zupanec: you are waiting for information from the province in terms of what the conditions might be for the

[1:52:54] Planner Zupanec: the water license and whether it will be approved.

[1:52:57] Planner Zupanec: It's at that point in time that you may wish to re-refer

[1:53:00] Planner Zupanec: the water license and the conditions to staff.

[1:53:03] Planner Zupanec: And then at that point, of course, there'll be likely

[1:53:08] Planner Zupanec: more opportunity to directly engage

[1:53:10] Planner Zupanec: with the applicant's consultants

[1:53:13] Planner Zupanec: if there's any outstanding questions.

[1:53:14] Planner Zupanec: But at this point in time, it seems unnecessary

[1:53:18] Planner Zupanec: since we're not asking you to make a recommendation.

[1:53:20] Planner Zupanec: And I don't think that there's any,

[1:53:23] Planner Zupanec: unless you have any points that you wish to clarify directly

[1:53:28] Planner Zupanec: with the freshwater specialist.

[1:53:30] Planner Zupanec: You know, we didn't bring him in today, for example,

[1:53:32] Planner Zupanec: because he wasn't requested to attend,

[1:53:35] Planner Zupanec: to be a resource for you today,

[1:53:37] Planner Zupanec: since there aren't any elements of the water plan

[1:53:40] Planner Zupanec: being discussed yet.

[1:53:42] Trustee Critchley: Thank you.

[1:53:43] Planner Zupanec: Does that

[1:53:44] Trustee Critchley: answer your question?

[1:53:44] Trustee Critchley: No, thank you.

[1:53:45] Chair Fast: Yeah, okay.

[1:53:46] Trustee Critchley: Yes, it does.

[1:53:47] Chair Fast: Very good.

[1:53:48] Chair Fast: Thank you.

[1:53:49] Chair Fast: Any more questions for the planner or the applicants,

[1:53:54] Chair Fast: co-applicants all right then I'm I think we might be ready to entertain motions and looking at page

[1:54:02] Chair Fast: 34 or Sonia go ahead I think it might

[1:54:06] Planner Zupanec: make more sense to preface the other

[1:54:11] Planner Zupanec: element of potential change to the bylaw that the co-owner co-applicant owner is requesting as well

[1:54:18] Planner Zupanec: so that when we go through the recommendations there might be just a few minor tweaks to make

[1:54:22] Chair Fast: Oh, please go ahead. Sorry, I didn't mean to jump the gun. I'm just looking at the clock.

[1:54:26] Chair Fast: No, it's okay.

[1:54:28] Planner Zupanec: I'm just going to this. This is bylaw 241. So this is the OCP bylaw.

[1:54:35] Planner Zupanec: And as you know, plan number two is to redesignate that parcel from rural to residential. And that

[1:54:43] Planner Zupanec: was based on the five lot maximum, and the total area of these lots, it would not meet the rural

[1:54:51] Planner Zupanec: rural designation currently it's rural and it requires a minimum lot size that the subdivision

[1:54:59] Planner Zupanec: layout wouldn't be able to meet and the residential lot size as a minimum lot size where there offers

[1:55:04] Planner Zupanec: that more flexibility and so that's why we proposed a residential designation in the OCP

[1:55:11] Planner Zupanec: and a subsequent residential R1 zone in the land use bylaw for the Danes Road parcels

[1:55:18] Planner Zupanec: so the co-applicant owner has re-looked at this or has looked at it and determined that this is

[1:55:27] Planner Zupanec: not in line with what they had requested initially and that they would want an amendment to the OCP

[1:55:34] Planner Zupanec: to permit this designation under the rural designation to be maintained even though it

[1:55:41] Planner Zupanec: doesn't meet the minimum average lot size sorry not the minimum but the minimum average lot size

[1:55:45] Planner Zupanec: um and that the site-specific zone also still be a rural r2 and in this case eight for those lots

[1:55:56] Planner Zupanec: so upon looking at your official community plan you you have a policy specific to what the minimum

[1:56:05] Planner Zupanec: average lot size should be for the r for the rural designated lands and that's four hectares

[1:56:12] Planner Zupanec: so it specifies they may not be less than four hectares and that's um direction to the subsequent

[1:56:21] Planner Zupanec: land use bylaw and your community to say we expect in the rural designation that these lots

[1:56:28] Planner Zupanec: will have a minimum average lot size no less than four hectares um so that's the rationale why this

[1:56:38] Planner Zupanec: was presented to you in this way so the request is that it actually be flipped back to rural

[1:56:44] Planner Zupanec: and that it be maintained in the rural r2 zoning as well so i don't want to give you that

[1:56:50] Planner Zupanec: uh to to that wording today i don't have that prepared today but i do have a resolution if

[1:56:56] Planner Zupanec: you want to consider that to to request staff to to to bring that back for future consideration

[1:57:02] Planner Zupanec: So that we would amend the OCP, we would basically be taking out this plan. That's the only change to this bylaw. But creating a site-specific R2-8 zone with the similar restrictions and regulations that you currently have as a proposed R1-5 zone.

[1:57:23] Planner Zupanec: and and this would be more in line with the surrounding rural designation and rural

[1:57:32] Planner Zupanec: zonings in this neighborhood it may require an amendment to the OCP in terms of text I will

[1:57:42] Planner Zupanec: still need to look at that a little bit further because generally we try not to clutter your

[1:57:48] Planner Zupanec: official community plan with site-specific exemptions but it appears that denman may

[1:57:55] Planner Zupanec: have done that in the past so i'm going to look at that if you decide that that's the route that

[1:57:59] Planner Zupanec: you want to go but if you would like a few minutes of a summary from the the owner of these parcels

[1:58:06] Planner Zupanec: as to their their rationale for wanting to maintain it this would be the time to do that

[1:58:11] Planner Zupanec: in order to inform whether you're ready to consider

[1:58:15] Planner Zupanec: a draft resolution requesting me

[1:58:19] Planner Zupanec: to bring that kind of language back.

[1:58:21] Chair Fast: What do you think, trustees?

[1:58:23] Chair Fast: Are we ready to make a motion requesting staff

[1:58:26] Chair Fast: to create an R2-8 zone for Danes Road

[1:58:30] Chair Fast: to maintain the rural something?

[1:58:33] Chair Fast: Or do you want more info from the co-op?

[1:58:36] Chair Fast: I

[1:58:37] Trustee Busheikin: don't understand yet why that was,

[1:58:39] Trustee Busheikin: you know, this is new and there was no written report.

[1:58:41] Trustee Busheikin: where I have enough time to digest it and I don't think I maybe caught everything I don't understand

[1:58:48] Trustee Busheikin: what the difference is in terms of impact on what can and can't be uh done and built so I would like

[1:58:55] Trustee Busheikin: to hear more okay please

[1:58:57] Chair Fast: take it away honey okay

[1:58:59] Voice 4: um so with my experience and working in this

[1:59:08] Voice 4: environment for 34 years um and having gone through as i said before some very deep analysis

[1:59:18] Voice 4: with holland bars and modus and in the other projects um to me and i want to be funny here

[1:59:28] Voice 4: if it if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then we shouldn't call it a sparrow and try

[1:59:35] Voice 4: to put webbed feet on it. So these new five lots, this zone, this accommodation of a generous gift

[1:59:46] Voice 4: from the contributing parcels to this to make this transaction possible. My point of view is that

[1:59:56] Voice 4: that the densities are coming from a.

[2:00:00] Voice 4: rural designation. The land that they land on is a rural designation. And in order to fit it into

[2:00:10] Voice 4: an R1-5, we run into, in my opinion, some significant issues, which give rise to one,

[2:00:19] Voice 4: one, two, three, four, four of the six explanations

[2:00:26] Voice 4: in the proposed R1-5 change for the site-specific issues.

[2:00:34] Voice 4: In R1, we can have unsubdivided locks with densities,

[2:00:40] Voice 4: with numerous or multiple principal residences.

[2:00:46] Voice 4: This is not what we're looking for here. We could have, for example, a subdivision that gets one lot that is big enough by the definition to hold three houses, and then four lots where there's only two dwellings, two densities available to build houses on those two lots.

[2:01:10] Voice 4: That is definitely not a desirable thing to have.

[2:01:15] Voice 4: While if it's left in R2 with a site-specific minimum average lot size of 2.83 hectares as opposed to the four, then we don't need to do all of these gymnastics.

[2:01:32] Voice 4: And we do have precedences on Denman Island to do site-specific R2 zones that maintain the minimum lot size of two hectares.

[2:01:44] Voice 4: We have R2-1, R2-2, R2-D2, and they're all over the place.

[2:01:57] Voice 4: I know there's two in the Wren Road area with R2 site-specific where the densities, the minimum average are way below that four hectares.

[2:02:09] Voice 4: There's no mention of that in the OCP as far as I have found.

[2:02:14] Voice 4: And so the simplest thing to avoid all of this is simply to call it R2 and site-specific.

[2:02:21] Voice 4: It doesn't change anything. You don't have to do any specific notes about secondary suites or dwellings or notwithstanding this and notwithstanding that.

[2:02:33] Voice 4: It is simply a site-specific designation that varies the minimum average lot size from 4 to 2.83.

[2:02:42] Voice 4: I believe that the OCP, the policy in the OCP under Housing Policy 2, gives you the discretion of making that change because it says that the lot size minimum average may not be less than four hectares.

[2:03:02] Voice 4: It doesn't say it must be, it must not be less than four hectares. And you've done it before. We've increased the minimum average lot size. In other instances, we're proposing to do it here with the Madigan, with the R27 designation.

[2:03:20] Voice 4: And I don't think there's anything here that runs counter to the intent and the culture that we have on Denman.

[2:03:30] Voice 4: What would run counter to it would be to create a site-specific zoning that is really difficult to understand unless you're a professional.

[2:03:37] Voice 4: And also to plunk down a little enclave of R1, the residential, in the middle of a large area that has R2, that has rural designation throughout.

[2:03:53] Voice 4: Remember that the R1 that we adopted when we transitioned and the Islands Trust was created was directly to capture those lots that we didn't want anymore in the Islands Trust.

[2:04:05] Voice 4: trust. The Frank Ney, Nanaimo Realty, Half Acre Lots, Cheek by Dowell on the coast. Our R1s are

[2:04:15] Voice 4: the Filongli, Little Burnaby, the Lakon Coast, Downtown. Those are the ones that are designated

[2:04:24] Voice 4: residential. To put this residential designation in the middle of the Northlands, it just isn't

[2:04:31] Voice 4: right in my opinion.

[2:04:33] Chair Fast: Thank you very much Henning and I'm going to ask Planner Zupanets to

[2:04:39] Chair Fast: confirm or not confirm or give your take on this. It sounds to me like it would be an efficient way

[2:04:47] Chair Fast: to streamline the project and keep things rural but Planner Zupanets?

[2:04:52] Planner Zupanec: Yeah so in terms of analysis

[2:04:55] Planner Zupanec: this is what we can suggest is if you wanted you know typically this would be in a staff report we

[2:04:59] Planner Zupanec: we provide you with the documentation so you can review it.

[2:05:02] Planner Zupanec: This was all sort of put together last week late,

[2:05:05] Planner Zupanec: so it's not reflected in this package, obviously.

[2:05:08] Planner Zupanec: So you can either ask for that information

[2:05:10] Planner Zupanec: to be brought back in the report

[2:05:12] Planner Zupanec: with the recommended changes,

[2:05:14] Planner Zupanec: or you feel confident today that you understand

[2:05:17] Planner Zupanec: enough about the issue to request staff

[2:05:20] Planner Zupanec: to come back with draft language

[2:05:22] Planner Zupanec: to make that necessary amendment as has been described,

[2:05:25] Planner Zupanec: revert it back to the rural designation

[2:05:27] Planner Zupanec: with a rural site-specific zone there's ways to you know close any loopholes in the current zoning

[2:05:36] Planner Zupanec: to ensure that there's five lots and one dwelling for each lot that's not an issue we but you know

[2:05:42] Planner Zupanec: i can appreciate that but that you want as few site-specific and despite clauses as possible

[2:05:48] Planner Zupanec: even though your land use bylaw is very rich with site-specific zones we can't get away from it in

[2:05:55] Planner Zupanec: in this case, anyway.

[2:05:58] Planner Zupanec: So I can do either of those two options for you

[2:06:03] Planner Zupanec: is bring back the information in the formal report

[2:06:06] Planner Zupanec: with the analysis or proceed with draft language.

[2:06:10] Planner Zupanec: I don't recommend you make changes today

[2:06:13] Planner Zupanec: because it would take too long to craft the wording

[2:06:16] Planner Zupanec: and it wouldn't necessarily be clear.

[2:06:20] Planner Zupanec: So, but either of those two other options

[2:06:23] Planner Zupanec: we can provide you with the draft resolution for that

[2:06:26] Planner Zupanec: and answer any questions

[2:06:28] Chair Fast: that you have about that now.

[2:06:31] Chair Fast: Good.

[2:06:31] Chair Fast: So if you've got draft language, that would help me

[2:06:34] Chair Fast: because I've been trying to keep penciled notes.

[2:06:36] Chair Fast: And Trustee Critchley?

[2:06:39] Trustee Critchley: Thank you.

[2:06:42] Trustee Critchley: It seems to me reasonable on the face of it,

[2:06:45] Trustee Critchley: but without full analysis and thought, it's hard to say.

[2:06:51] Trustee Critchley: But if I'm reading the room correctly,

[2:06:54] Trustee Critchley: correctly, I'm not hearing from our planner any objection to it, saying, no, you shouldn't do this

[2:07:02] Trustee Critchley: for this reason or that. So I'm inclined towards just going along with the wording that you're

[2:07:10] Trustee Critchley: going to produce to direct you to draw this up. That way, it's simpler. You don't have to draw

[2:07:17] Trustee Critchley: up another staff report and take your precious time to do that. That's the way I'm leaning at

[2:07:22] Trustee Critchley: at the moment, but I'd like to hear from others.

[2:07:24] Chair Fast: Okay, thank you.

[2:07:25] Chair Fast: Trustee Beshekin.

[2:07:27] Trustee Busheikin: Happy with the idea of asking staff to proceed

[2:07:31] Trustee Busheikin: with creating the draft language and bringing it back.

[2:07:33] Trustee Busheikin: I mean, as I agree with Trustee Critchley on the face of it,

[2:07:38] Trustee Busheikin: it makes a lot of sense.

[2:07:40] Trustee Busheikin: And I particularly take the point about what R1 is

[2:07:45] Trustee Busheikin: and where it is and what it's for,

[2:07:48] Trustee Busheikin: but this is quick.

[2:07:50] Trustee Busheikin: So I just would like to think that,

[2:07:52] Trustee Busheikin: you know i will now have more time to think about this and do a bit of study if a giant red flag

[2:08:00] Trustee Busheikin: comes up there's still a chance we're not making a final decision today um so i would suggest that

[2:08:09] Trustee Busheikin: we uh here it is i'm

[2:08:13] Chair Fast: happy this would be this would be um motion number six yep i'm happy to

[2:08:19] Trustee Busheikin: move that motion at the right time as number six or if it's better to move it as number one well

[2:08:27] Planner Zupanec: yeah actually that's a good point it

[2:08:29] Planner Zupanec: does it does influence one of the other staff

[2:08:33] Planner Zupanec: recommendations regarding the secondary suites the the designations

[2:08:36] Trustee Busheikin: yeah it does i that i'm

[2:08:39] Trustee Busheikin: thinking about that and um very well go ahead laura okay i move that the denman island local

[2:08:45] Trustee Busheikin: trust committee request staff to prepare draft language to a man proposed by laws number 241

[2:08:50] Trustee Busheikin: ocp and 242 lub in order to maintain the r2 designation and an r2 site specific zone for

[2:08:57] Trustee Busheikin: the receiver lots four and five danes road thank

[2:09:00] Chair Fast: you and do i have a second second very good and um

[2:09:05] Chair Fast: any more discussion or questions no hearing

[2:09:09] Chair Fast: none i'll call the question all those in favor

[2:09:12] Chair Fast: aye aye aye

[2:09:14] Chair Fast: that's three hands went up that passes unanimously thank you very much

[2:09:18] Chair Fast: and uh what about these other ones trustee christian

[2:09:24] Chair Fast: do you want to start yeah

[2:09:26] Trustee Critchley: i would say

[2:09:27] Trustee Critchley: i'm prepared to move uh essentially recommendation one but i'm going to delete the number two so if

[2:09:34] Trustee Critchley: somebody wants to you know feel stronger that should be in there um then you can make an

[2:09:40] Trustee Critchley: amendment or not second this motion but up i am prepared to move uh recommendation one and the

[2:09:48] Trustee Critchley: subparagraphs one three four and five okay

[2:09:56] Chair Fast: so this uh just for the sake of the recording um

[2:10:00] Chair Fast: and because we're renumbering uh this would read that denman island local trust committee bylaw

[2:10:05] Chair Fast: number 242 cited as denman island local land use bylaw 2008 amendment number one 2021 be amended

[2:10:14] Chair Fast: amended with 1, 3, 4, and 5 on agenda page 34 of today's agenda. Is that correct? Correct.

[2:10:28] Chair Fast: Thank you. Okay, so we have a motion with a bunch of changes from the table that the planner

[2:10:37] Chair Fast: walked through earlier. And do I have a seconder or would we like to discuss why you're proposing

[2:10:45] Chair Fast: to remove section, leave out section two?

[2:10:51] Trustee Critchley: Yeah, I'm happy to give my rationale for that. I feel

[2:10:55] Trustee Critchley: that I need more information. And apparently there is at least one report already available,

[2:11:01] Trustee Critchley: but not before us today, which sets out the rationale for the establishment of the covenant.

[2:11:08] Trustee Critchley: And I would actually like to look at the property myself to get a better feel for this issue. I'm

[2:11:15] Trustee Critchley: not saying that I'm opposed necessarily I can certainly be persuaded on the

[2:11:22] Trustee Critchley: thing but I just need more okay

[2:11:25] Chair Fast: thank you very much that now I now I get it

[2:11:28] Chair Fast: and you want more information into a site visit basically okay then we've got

[2:11:37] Chair Fast: a motion on the floor and do I have a seconder before

[2:11:42] Trustee Busheikin: I second it I just would

[2:11:44] Trustee Busheikin: would like to ask staff if we leave that in there number um line line item four um how

[2:11:53] Trustee Busheikin: complex is it to then come back and remove it line

[2:12:00] Chair Fast: item four being the one that begins so whatever

[2:12:03] Trustee Busheikin: the line that we are removing yeah if we remove two one two which then doesn't remove line item

[2:12:11] Trustee Busheikin: for a bit of number soup happening here um uh yeah how i mean if because i i i understand the

[2:12:21] Trustee Busheikin: concern and and i think it's um good due process uh to to learn a little more i i i get that but

[2:12:30] Trustee Busheikin: i also if this is would slow down the whole process i'd rather include included in them

[2:12:40] Trustee Busheikin: I don't know I don't

[2:12:42] Chair Fast: know that's my question well we are early in the process so I think this is a

[2:12:45] Chair Fast: question for the planner is um what is your recommendation you

[2:12:51] Trustee Busheikin: will know my question was

[2:12:53] Trustee Busheikin: how complex

[2:12:54] Trustee Busheikin: is it to then come back and um uh remove line item for section 1.2

[2:13:03] Trustee Busheikin: uh if we care to do so and how that would would it slow down the process significantly

[2:13:09] Trustee Busheikin: yeah

[2:13:10] Planner Zupanec: no i don't think so because you're still at first reading and every reading is the opportunity

[2:13:18] Planner Zupanec: to clean up and make those tweaks so there's there's two natural opportunities for that to

[2:13:24] Planner Zupanec: happen plus you know in between that you can also still do readings as amended when new

[2:13:29] Planner Zupanec: information is presented okay

[2:13:32] Trustee Busheikin: so i will second it okay

[2:13:34] Chair Fast: thank you so that seconds um all of them

[2:13:38] Chair Fast: except the the the second item that's two little eyes right just making sure we're all agreed

[2:13:46] Chair Fast: okay thank you

[2:13:48] Voice 7: correct very

[2:13:49] Chair Fast: good so we've got a motion moved and seconded any more discussion

[2:13:53] Chair Fast: then i'll call the question all those in favor aye aye aye

[2:14:01] Chair Fast: thank you that's three hands went up

[2:14:03] Chair Fast: and uh that motion passes uh without the one little the two little eyes okay thank you and

[2:14:11] Chair Fast: the next motion that's down on page 34 who'd like to read this one or do we want to i

[2:14:20] Trustee Busheikin: will move that

[2:14:20] Trustee Busheikin: demin island local trust committee bylaw number two for two said it is demin island land use bylaw

[2:14:25] Trustee Busheikin: 2008 amendment number one 2021 be given first reading as amended thank

[2:14:31] Chair Fast: you do i have a second

[2:14:32] Chair Fast: very good and uh any more discussion all those in favor no

[2:14:37] Voice 7: hi hi

[2:14:39] Chair Fast: thank you that was three hands went

[2:14:42] Chair Fast: up uh for clarity for vicky and uh so that motion passes and um number three trustee critchley do

[2:14:49] Chair Fast: you want to i'll

[2:14:50] Trustee Critchley: move then yes i'll move the denman island local trust committee bylaw number

[2:14:54] Trustee Critchley: 243 cited as denman island housing agreement bylaw be amended by removing clause four in section b

[2:15:02] Trustee Critchley: agreement over the lands close quote in its entirety thank

[2:15:08] Chair Fast: you and do i have a second i do

[2:15:10] Chair Fast: thank you and any more discussion all in favor no all

[2:15:17] Voice 7: right three

[2:15:18] Chair Fast: hands went up thank you very much

[2:15:20] Chair Fast: we've got a little bit more of a lag developing so if you wait for me to pause it's because i'm

[2:15:25] Chair Fast: waiting to hear from trustee critchley okay over the page we've got uh recommendation

[2:15:30] Chair Fast: recommendation numbered four it's actually our fifth one today um go ahead trustee beshagan

[2:15:37] Chair Fast: i move

[2:15:38] Trustee Busheikin: that deminal and local trust committee bylaw number 243 cited as deminal and housing

[2:15:42] Trustee Busheikin: agreement bylaw be given second reading as amended thank

[2:15:46] Chair Fast: you do i have a seconder

[2:15:47] Voice 7: very

[2:15:48] Chair Fast: good motion motion moved and seconded any more discussion then i'll call the question

[2:15:54] Chair Fast: all those in favor aye aye

[2:15:57] Voice 7: aye

[2:15:58] Chair Fast: three hands went up that passes unanimously that's great thank you

[2:16:02] Chair Fast: the next one trustee critchley i'll

[2:16:05] Trustee Critchley: move that that the deminon local trust committee requests

[2:16:09] Trustee Critchley: staff to work with the applicant to prepare the following amendments to the draft restrictive

[2:16:13] Trustee Critchley: a covenant for 1151 Northwest Road, DERZ 2021.1 DHA, for the future local trust committee

[2:16:24] Trustee Critchley: consideration. One, protection of riparian habitat along the western boundary and establishment of

[2:16:32] Trustee Critchley: a three-meter minimum setback and restoration area along the eastern edge of the wetland.

[2:16:37] Trustee Critchley: Requirements for a landscape buffer, wetland area fencing to be constructed prior to any

[2:16:42] Trustee Critchley: construction on the site and maintained in perpetuity, and sighting of a trail consistent

[2:16:49] Trustee Critchley: with the baseline inventory report recommendations dated February 2, 2022, and two, requirements for

[2:16:58] Trustee Critchley: stormwater management, brackets, drainage, close bracket, plan as part of a future sighting and

[2:17:05] Trustee Critchley: use permit.

[2:17:06] Chair Fast: Thank you. Do I have a seconder? Second. Thank you. So that's a motion moved and

[2:17:12] Chair Fast: seconded any more discussion call the question all those in favor aye aye

[2:17:19] Voice 7: aye

[2:17:20] Chair Fast: thank you that's

[2:17:21] Chair Fast: three hands went up the motion carries and uh i think that's all we've got in front of us uh today

[2:17:28] Chair Fast: um trustee beshaken yeah

[2:17:30] Trustee Busheikin: i have two things um and one is just a comment has been on my mind for the

[2:17:34] Trustee Busheikin: last half hour just and it's more of a point of order i wish i'd brought it up at the time but i

[2:17:38] Trustee Busheikin: want to just ask uh us to be aware of our language and not using inflammatory language and there was

[2:17:43] Trustee Busheikin: a comment about vilifying humans that I just thought was inflammatory language. And if you

[2:17:50] Trustee Busheikin: look at the recommendation from DCA, it's about having an area where it's designated not for

[2:17:59] Trustee Busheikin: human visitation, not for humans to visit. It's a very tiny little area that clearly has some

[2:18:05] Trustee Busheikin: sensitive ecological situation going on. There's a tiny little bit of Denman. And I think that

[2:18:11] Trustee Busheikin: But having small, special ecosystems or damaged ecosystems set aside within a very large, publicly accessible area is not the same as vilifying humans.

[2:18:23] Trustee Busheikin: And it just, it integrates the work of conservancy, but also the work we do, which is trying to balance supporting humans' love and uses and ability to live here in a full way with protecting the environment.

[2:18:39] Trustee Busheikin: So I just, it's been on my mind since the word came up, and I just want to ask all of us just to be aware of our language, and I will also endeavor to do that.

[2:18:51] Trustee Busheikin: And then there's just one more thing, and I know we're tight for time, and maybe we can do this in March, but there was a discussion in the staff report about definitions of dwelling multifamily that did raise an issue.

[2:19:04] Trustee Busheikin: I do have a resolution prepared to deal with that.

[2:19:09] Trustee Busheikin: But if it can wait till March and if people have to go and they just have to go, fine.

[2:19:14] Trustee Busheikin: But I would put that resolution forward if there's time.

[2:19:16] Trustee Busheikin: I think it won't be controversial.

[2:19:19] Chair Fast: Well, thank you.

[2:19:20] Chair Fast: And I'll ask the planner, Planner Zupanets, would that be helpful to you to deal with

[2:19:25] Chair Fast: that now as opposed to in March?

[2:19:28] Planner Zupanec: Oh, it's not whether it's helpful or not.

[2:19:30] Planner Zupanec: it's it's if you're willing to provide some clarity and direction then we'll do our best to

[2:19:36] Planner Zupanec: advance it okay bring it on okay

[2:19:39] Trustee Busheikin: and i'm sorry i don't have it written out so i mean i haven't

[2:19:42] Trustee Busheikin: written up but i haven't sent it along so i'm going to read it slowly i move that the denman

[2:19:47] Trustee Busheikin: island local trust committee can you speak more a little more yes i move that the den i move that

[2:19:54] Trustee Busheikin: that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee

[2:19:55] Trustee Busheikin: amend bylaw number 242,

[2:19:59] Trustee Busheikin: cited as Denman Island Land Use Bylaw 2008,

[2:20:05] Trustee Busheikin: amendment number 1, 2021,

[2:20:09] Trustee Busheikin: by replacing the word two,

[2:20:13] Trustee Busheikin: I get that should be in quotes, two,

[2:20:16] Trustee Busheikin: with quote three, unquote.

[2:20:20] Trustee Busheikin: Oh, this is T-W-O?

[2:20:22] Trustee Busheikin: T-W-O, yeah.

[2:20:24] Trustee Busheikin: Okay.

[2:20:24] Trustee Busheikin: By replacing the word two with three in the definition of, quote, dwelling, comma, multifamily, unquote, in Regulation 1.2 on page two of the draft amendment.

[2:20:51] Trustee Busheikin: Okay.

[2:20:53] Trustee Busheikin: Let me ask first, did you get that, Vicki?

[2:20:59] Trustee Busheikin: Yes, I did.

[2:21:00] Trustee Busheikin: Thank you.

[2:21:01] Trustee Busheikin: You're a star.

[2:21:02] Trustee Busheikin: are um and would you

[2:21:05] Trustee Busheikin: like to speak to it please go ahead yeah i mean this was something that came

[2:21:08] Trustee Busheikin: up because we're creating a new definition of uh dwelling multi-family as being something that's

[2:21:14] Trustee Busheikin: two units and up and that runs into conflict with our current uh secondary suite regulations which

[2:21:23] Trustee Busheikin: which then it turns a secondary suite in a dwelling

[2:21:30] Trustee Busheikin: into a multi-unit dwelling,

[2:21:33] Trustee Busheikin: and then that opens it up to a whole new situation

[2:21:36] Trustee Busheikin: in terms of the land use bylaw.

[2:21:39] Trustee Busheikin: And so this just avoids that.

[2:21:41] Trustee Busheikin: We are planning a review of housing regulations,

[2:21:44] Trustee Busheikin: ideally to happen fairly soon,

[2:21:47] Trustee Busheikin: depending on the budget and other things.

[2:21:50] Trustee Busheikin: And this could be looked at in more depth,

[2:21:53] Trustee Busheikin: but this certainly tidies it up for now and I don't see it having any negative connotations.

[2:22:02] Trustee Busheikin: Okay

[2:22:02] Chair Fast: thank you and I just have a quick question if for example for this and this is me from a

[2:22:10] Chair Fast: distance not being nearly as familiar as anybody else if the DHA affordable housing parcel

[2:22:19] Chair Fast: parcel uh uh site plan did decide to have a duplex on it would that cause problems

[2:22:29] Chair Fast: or more more problems or less i didn't think of that that's a question for sonny i think

[2:22:35] Chair Fast: because if there was one duplex and some other ones yeah

[2:22:41] Planner Zupanec: yeah so that's why we didn't have a

[2:22:43] Planner Zupanec: recommendation for you on this particular issue is likely it would be better to do a bit of analysis

[2:22:51] Planner Zupanec: and bring something back in terms of a staff recommendation

[2:22:53] Planner Zupanec: on how to proceed, this quick fix may,

[2:22:59] Planner Zupanec: it wouldn't restrict DHA in any way, shape or form

[2:23:02] Planner Zupanec: from doing what they're proposing to do,

[2:23:04] Planner Zupanec: but there might be some other unintended consequences

[2:23:07] Planner Zupanec: of how it's defined elsewhere.

[2:23:09] Planner Zupanec: So let us possibly look at that in more detail.

[2:23:17] Planner Zupanec: And back for you.

[2:23:19] Planner Zupanec: Trustee Critchley.

[2:23:22] Trustee Critchley: Thanks. Yeah, I'm a bit wary of the unintended consequences aspect of this, unless there was a very clear support by the planner. And I'm also concerned that we haven't really telegraphed this. It is a change in land use bylaw. We haven't sort of given any notice of it, really.

[2:23:40] Trustee Critchley: really. There is mention of the issue, of course. And I think that that was the solution adopted on

[2:23:47] Trustee Critchley: was it main island, if I remember correctly, that is mentioned in a report somewhere that

[2:23:53] Trustee Critchley: one island had sort of made that patch for the thing. But yeah, I'd prefer a little analysis

[2:23:59] Trustee Critchley: and thought about it rather than doing it off the fly. Thanks.

[2:24:02] Chair Fast: Yeah, I'm also just concerned.

[2:24:04] Chair Fast: Thank you. That's great, because I think that the applicants might want to think about it as well.

[2:24:08] Chair Fast: and so is that a motion that you I

[2:24:14] Trustee Busheikin: take all that back it wasn't seconded so and

[2:24:18] Trustee Busheikin: I'm withdrawing it okay thank you then thinking

[2:24:23] Trustee Critchley: of it yeah thank you for

[2:24:25] Trustee Critchley: thinking we

[2:24:26] Trustee Busheikin: can do to keep it will get analyzed and discussed at some point do

[2:24:32] Trustee Busheikin: we need a resolution about that no

[2:24:35] Planner Zupanec: as part of this application no I think if

[2:24:38] Planner Zupanec: be just you know we've noted it we we need to spend a little bit more time on it before it

[2:24:43] Planner Zupanec: goes to public hearing in that regard just to see what we can do but yeah there's no risk there's

[2:24:48] Planner Zupanec: no risk to the application at this point in time just to be clear for the public's understanding

[2:24:54] Planner Zupanec: of this this is a a piece in the land use bylaw that may need some tweaking but it does not

[2:25:00] Planner Zupanec: infringe on the ability for this application to move forward so

[2:25:03] Chair Fast: okay thank you for thinking of

[2:25:06] Chair Fast: it and bringing it up it's good for it to be on everybody's uh yeah

[2:25:12] Trustee Busheikin: one more overall comment will

[2:25:14] Trustee Busheikin: be very brief i want to thank our planner sonia zupanets when we set up this meeting um we said

[2:25:21] Trustee Busheikin: well we'll have those referrals and let's at least look at them and she said i don't say how i'll have

[2:25:25] Trustee Busheikin: any time to provide any analysis however and look at what she's provided us like this is really

[2:25:30] Trustee Busheikin: thorough and a lot of work in a really strict turnaround time. It's nothing

[2:25:36] Trustee Busheikin: short of miraculous and I really think that needs to be said publicly so thank

[2:25:41] Trustee Busheikin: you Planner Zupanis.

[2:25:44] Chair Fast: That's great, thank you very much. I see some clapping hands there and

[2:25:48] Chair Fast: then just to before we end the meeting the Trust Council March 8th to 10th is

[2:25:55] Chair Fast: is in Nanaimo and just for anybody who's interested

[2:25:59] Chair Fast: in catching up with Trust Council,

[2:26:01] Chair Fast: there'll be some interesting things on the agenda

[2:26:03] Chair Fast: and the budget, which relates to how we can hold meetings

[2:26:08] Chair Fast: and those kinds of things in pandemic times.

[2:26:11] Chair Fast: And our next Denman LTC meeting is March 22nd,

[2:26:16] Chair Fast: hopefully in person.

[2:26:18] Chair Fast: And with that, unless there's anything else,

[2:26:22] Chair Fast: I think, can I call for adjournment?

[2:26:27] Voice 7: yes

[2:26:27] Chair Fast: thank you okay well then um i'll move to adjourn and we're at 12 27 so we ran over a

[2:26:33] Chair Fast: little bit thank you everybody for sticking with us thank you vicky in the background and thank you

[2:26:38] Chair Fast: planners upanets and guests uh for informing the discussion today thank you very much thank you

[2:26:45] Chair Fast: Bye, y'all. Bye now.

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 1 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
 
Denman Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Special Meeting 
 
Date: 
Location: 
February 15, 2022 
Electronic Meeting 
 
Members Present: Sue Ellen Fast, Chair 
 David Critchley, Local Trustee 
 Laura Busheikin, Local Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Sonja Zupanec, Island Planner 
 Vicky Bockman, Recorder 
  
Others Present: Ione Smith, Upland Agricultural Consulting 
 Approximately two (2) members of the public 
  
1. CALL TO ORDER 
“Please note, the order of agenda items may be modified during the meeting. Times are provided 
for convenience only and are subject to change.” 
Chair Fast called the meeting to order at 10:01 am.  She introduced Trustees, staff and recorder; 
and acknowledged that the meeting was being held electronically in territory of the Coast Salish 
First Nations that includes K'ómoks First Nation. She explained that this meeting has a limited 
agenda with matters of a time-sensitive nature for consideration; and due to technical and staff 
limitations public participation is not possible at this meeting. 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
A Trustee expressed concern regarding the absence of opportunity for public participation in 
today’s agenda, expressing a desire to enable the ability to have Town Halls or Delegations in 
electronic meetings. Chair Fast advised of technical issues and staff limitations that are 
contributing to this situation, reported that this is a topic for discussion at the next Trust Council 
meeting, and noted that the next Local Trust Committee (LTC) meeting may be held in person 
and would include public participation. 
By general consent the agenda was approved as presented. 
3. BUSINESS ITEMS 
3.1 Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes dated January 13, 2022 
By general consent the January 13, 2022 minutes were adopted. 
3.2 Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes dated November 2, 2021  
By general consent the November 2, 2021 minutes were adopted. 
3.3 Denman Farming Regulations Review Project - Staff Report 

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 2 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
Ione Smith, consultant, agrologist and project manager, presented the Staff Report that 
provides an update on the project and asks the LTC to review, comment, and endorse 
the draft Farming Regulation Community Questionnaire. 
She outlined the work undertaken to advance the project that includes review of data, 
maps, reports, and policy with extensive interviews to gather informed feedback to 
develop the questionnaire.  
Trustees expressed the desire to include the submission dated February 1, 2022 from H. 
Holm with other project documents, with the exception of a section relating to a 
submission that was on record at the time of the adoption of the Farm Plan. They 
acknowledged the need to organize the documents on this project which span many 
years. 
DE-2022-009 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee request staff to include in the Islands 
Trust website as project documents the items listed as items 1) a, b, c, and e in the letter 
from Harlene Holm dated February 1, 2022. 
 
Trustees explained that the need to highlight current discussions on this project to assist the public to 
navigate through the abundance of documents on the project site. They clarified that item 1)d can be 
found in the record from adoption of the Farm Plan, and suggested that staff organize the documents on 
the project webpage under general headings. 
CARRIED 
 
Discussion on the draft Farming Regulation Community Questionnaire included the 
following: 
 The complexity and length of the questionnaire was of concern, however, was 
considered necessary, as responses to a preliminary draft without the contextual 
information indicated confusion of jurisdictional limits, while a version with 
explanation of what the Islands Trust can do will likely produce more informed 
responses. An online version of the questionnaire can be condensed with the ability 
to expand for further information. 
 The survey will be mailed out and staff suggested a drop off location be established 
that can be used for returns. Trustees considered options and determined to 
continue reviewing this following the meeting. 
 
Comments on the content of the questionnaire included: 
 Overview: change “Denman Island Farm Bylaw” to “Denman Island Land Use Bylaw 
and Farming Regulations”; 
 Definition of Horticulture:  add an explanation of the implications if not defined at 
all; 
 Secondary Dwellings in the ALR:  include a question regarding restrictions for 
secondary dwellings such as: would you support a maximum overall combined 
primary and secondary dwelling size of 500 m
2
?  
 Tourism Accommodation in the ALR: correct the information to reflect that B&Bs are 
allowed and are regulated in the Land Use Bylaw; 

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 3 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
 Temporary Use Permits: suggest including a qualifier such as “the intention generally 
is” that the most common form of permitting is through the use of TUPs which 
would provide up to 3 years of approved use which can be renewed once, for 6 years 
total. The last sentence requires reworking as the Official Community Plan (OCP) and 
Land Use Bylaw (LUB) do not support granting a rezoning for a secondary dwelling or 
tourist accommodation. 
 
Trustee Busheikin offered to work with the consultant to suggest edits to the documents 
to increase ease of understanding and readability.  
 
DE-2022-010 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee generally endorses the “Denman Island 
Farming Regulation Community Questionnaire” dated February 2022 subject to the 
points discussed at the meeting”. 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-011 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee release up to $2,000 from the Farming 
Regulation Review Project budget for advertising and direct mail out of the 
questionnaire to Denman Island residents and property owners. 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-012 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to work with the consultant 
to schedule and advertise a special meeting to hold a Community Information Meeting 
in the spring for the Farming Regulations Review Project. 
CARRIED 
3.3.1 Submission dated February 1, 2022 from H. Holm 
Received for information and discussed in agenda item 3.3. 
3.4 DE-RZ-2021.1 (Denman Housing Association) - Staff Report  
Planner Zupanec summarized recommended amendments to Proposed Bylaw Nos. 242 
(LUB) and 243 (Housing Agreement) as outlined in Attachment 1 Table 1 and Table 2 of 
the Staff Report relating to DE-RZ-2021.1 (DHA). 
Discussion of the proposed amendments outlined in Table 1 and Table 2 included the 
following points: 
 Denman Green 
 With the identification of a wetland on the Denman Green parcel resulting in a 
reduced area able to be developed and causing site constraints, maximum 
flexibility for setback restrictions and minimum parking requirements are 
proposed; 
 Concern was expressed that if on-site parking is reduced to one vehicle per 
affordable housing unit that there may be overflow parking for second vehicles 
on the adjacent roadway causing safety hazards and other issues. 

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 4 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
 
Dave Ricketts, speaking on behalf of the Denman Housing Association, 
supported the reduction in minimum required parking due to site constraints 
and commented that requiring access to parking on an adjacent site would 
significantly extend the project timeline. 
 
Trustees recognized that the location of the project may reduce the need for 
some vehicles, and affirmed that the priority is to the affordable housing, 
however, acknowledged the responsibility to address parking issues and 
suggested that the applicant explore options for a solution to this issue. 
 It is important that the restrictive covenant references the newly identified 
wetland to ensure that at the time of construction the site plan and necessary 
buffer or fencing requirements are in place. 
 Planner Zupanec clarified that there is no need for the Freshwater Specialist or a 
Planner to communicate directly with DHA’s engineers to reconcile aspects of 
the water plan issues, and she explained the process. 
 
Danes Road Receiver Lots 4 and 5 
 Henning Nielson, the owner and co-applicant, noted that the adjacent covenant 
area buffer was established to protect the integrity of the watercourse. He 
expressed the opinion that the additional restriction of requiring a 30 metre 
setback to the covenant area is not necessary in this case, and asked that the 
property not be encumbered further. He added that the topography of the site 
further ensures that the covenant setback is sufficient. He noted that a 30 metre 
setback to the covenant area would remove the possibility of views on the lots, 
basically devaluing the attractiveness of the properties which are a necessary 
element to the development of the Denman Green housing project.  He offered 
to forward a copy of the environmental assessment completed a year ago to 
support his position and provide more information for Trustees. 
 
Planner Zupanec advised that the owner and co-applicant has recently requested a 
change relating to the Danes Road receiver parcel that has not been addressed in the 
Staff Report. Discussion on this requested amendment included the following points: 
 Proposed Bylaw No. 241 (OCP) currently proposes a change in designated 
zoning from Rural to Residential and in Proposed Bylaw No. 242 (LUB), a change 
from Rural 2-R2 to Residential 1(5)-R1(5) which is reflective of minimum lot size 
not meeting the Rural requirement of no less than 4 hectares. 
 Henning Nielson, owner and co-applicant, has advised that this was not in line 
with the original request and is requesting that the R2 rural designation be 
maintained as a site-specific zone with minimum average lot size of less than 4 
hectares. He pointed out that other site-specific lots that vary the minimum 
average lot size exist on Denman Island, this change would eliminate the need 
for notes regarding secondary suites, that the densities are being transferred 
from a rural designation, the area has rural designations throughout, and this 
decision is within the authority of the LTC. 
 

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 5 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
DE-2022-013 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to prepare draft language to 
amend proposed Bylaw Nos. 241 (Official Community Plan) and 242 (Land Use Bylaw) in 
order to maintain the R2 designation and an R2 site specific zone for the receiver lots 4 
and 5 (Danes Road). 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-014 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 242 cited as “Denman Island 
Land Use Bylaw, 2008, Amendment No. 1, 2021” be amended: 
i. Section 1.20, Line Item 2, be amended to read “Despite line 10 in Table 1 of this 
Section, a secondary suite is permitted in a principle dwelling in the R1(5) zone”; 
ii. Section 1.21, Line Item 1 be removed in its entirety and subsequent line items 
numbered chronologically; 
iii. Section 1.22, Table 8 – Site Specific Regulations, R4(1) – add a new line after 
item 5 to read: “6 Despite line 1 in Table 5 of this Section, the minimum setback 
of all buildings and structures, except for free standing photovoltaic solar arrays, 
is 4.0 metres from an exterior lot line and 3.0 metres from an interior lot line.”; 
and renumber subsequent line items chronologically; 
iv. Section 1.22, Table 8 – Site Specific Regulations, R4(1), Line Item 8 – reduce the 
minimum required number of automobile parking spaces required to 1.0 per 
affordable housing unit. 
 
A Trustee explained that Section 1.20, Line Item 4 regarding the requirement for additional 
setback from the conservation covenant is not requested to be removed at this time as more 
information and a site visit would be helpful in the consideration of the matter. 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-015 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 242 cited as “Denman Island 
Land Use Bylaw, 2008, Amendment No. 1, 2021” be given first reading as amended. 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-016 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 243 cited as “Denman Island 
Housing Agreement Bylaw” be amended by removing clause iv in “section b. Agreement 
over the Lands” in its entirety. 
CARRIED 
DE-2022-017 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 243 cited as “Denman Island 
Housing Agreement Bylaw” be given second reading as amended. 
CARRIED 

ADOPTED 
Denman Island  ADOPTED 6 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
February 15, 2022 
DE-2022-018 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the Denman Island Local Trust Committee request staff to work with the applicant 
to prepare the following amendments to the draft restrictive covenant for 1151 
Northwest Road, DE-RZ-2021.1 (DHA), for future Local Trust Committee consideration: 
i. Protection of riparian habitat along the western boundary and establishment of 
a 3.0 metre minimum setback and restoration area along the eastern edge of 
the wetland. Requirements for a landscape buffer, wetland area fencing to be 
constructed prior to any construction on the site and maintained in perpetuity; 
and siting of a trail consistent with the “Baseline Inventory” report 
recommendations dated February 2, 2022; and 
ii. Requirements for a stormwater management (drainage) plan as part of a future 
Siting and Use Permit. 
CARRIED 
Trustee Busheikin made a point of order in reference to a comment made during discussion of 
the setback to a covenant area, asking everyone to be aware of and not to use inflammatory 
language as it denigrates the work being done to balance living here in a full way with protecting 
the environment. 
 
Trustees discussed the definition of “dwelling, multi-family” and deferred consideration of 
amending this definition for clarity pending further analysis. 
 
4. ADJOURNMENT 
Chair Fast advised that Trust Council will be meeting in Nanaimo on March 10
th
; and the next 
regular LTC business meeting is scheduled for March 22,
 
2022. 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 12:27 pm. 
 
 
_________________________ 
Sue Ellen Fast, Chair 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Vicky Bockman, Recorder