Gambier Island Local Trust Committee community information meeting, July 21, 2023

[0:00:21] Voice 4: just

[0:00:41] Voice 1: waiting to

[0:00:42] Voice 4: uh make sure the technology is really working

[0:00:44] Voice 4: yeah does it does it it just i'm not mistaken we're probably

[0:01:04] Voice 4: So good afternoon, everyone. Welcome

[0:01:08] Voice 2: to the Gambrian Local Trust Committee

[0:01:10] Voice 2: Specialty and Information Meeting. My name, for those of you that aren't familiar with this

[0:01:16] Voice 2: with me, is Peter Lockham, and I'm elected on Cedis Island, which is in Black and Opelika

[0:01:23] Voice 2: Territory. And I'm really grateful to be here today as the chair of your local trust committee.

[0:01:28] Voice 2: committee here in Gibson, which is in the territory and broadly the Alms Trust, covering

[0:01:39] Voice 2: vast areas of the Coastal Territory, has given me vast opportunities for learning about the

[0:01:49] Voice 2: people who have lived on the coast here since time immemorial.

[0:01:52] Voice 2: I'm grateful for that.

[0:01:55] Voice 2: Just a brief, a few introductions.

[0:01:57] Voice 2: introductions. Joe Bernardo, Beach Island, both elected from Cambridge, Stanford, Amber

[0:02:02] Voice 2: Island, and Wallace McCargar, our planner for today. She's going to be doing most of

[0:02:09] Voice 2: the work. And we have at the end, Diane Corbett. I almost got that. Diane Corbett during our

[0:02:19] Voice 2: minutes today. So thank you, everybody, for being here. And thank you for taking time

[0:02:24] Voice 2: time out on a Friday in the middle of summer. I'm grateful for your participation and interest.

[0:02:34] Voice 2: So I'm going to call the meeting to order. We have an agenda. I don't anticipate there'll be

[0:02:39] Voice 2: any additional items to add as we've only advertised this as a community information

[0:02:43] Voice 2: meeting regarding the Kitsa and shoreline protection project. So we'll have a presentation

[0:02:49] Voice 2: for staff, and then we'll have a Q&A period.

[0:02:52] Voice 2: I always like to speak about the legislative process

[0:02:56] Voice 2: because it's not necessarily clear to everybody

[0:02:58] Voice 2: that there's a fundamental process

[0:03:00] Voice 2: that we're required to go through,

[0:03:02] Voice 2: which includes community information meetings,

[0:03:04] Voice 2: which is an opportunity to tell you

[0:03:06] Voice 2: what it is that we're doing, what the bylaws mean,

[0:03:09] Voice 4: and

[0:03:09] Voice 2: where we're going with it and providing you

[0:03:11] Voice 2: with an opportunity for questions and answers.

[0:03:14] Voice 2: This is not a public hearing,

[0:03:16] Voice 2: which is the opportunity you have

[0:03:18] Voice 2: have when we get further readings and go to public hearing to seek endorsement or not

[0:03:23] Voice 2: from the community. So that's what we want to hear about what you think about the bylaw,

[0:03:28] Voice 2: whether you agree with it or you don't agree with it. This is an opportunity for some conversations

[0:03:33] Voice 2: about the intent. So I like to try and keep it in that stream because there's a legislative

[0:03:41] Voice 2: requirement to record all of your points of view in the public hearing process, not in

[0:03:49] Voice 2: that's it the trust is listed so uh with that i'm going to turn it over to uh plan cargar

[0:04:01] Voice 4: welcome everyone thanks for joining us on a sunny friday afternoon

[0:04:07] Voice 5: so i just have approximately 15 minute presentation that i'll run through and it'll

[0:04:12] Voice 5: give you an overview of the shoreline protection project including the work that's been completed

[0:04:17] Voice 5: it up to date. I'll spend some time on the proposed development permit area and the amendment bylaws.

[0:04:23] Voice 5: I'll talk about the development permit application process and provide some scenarios and then we'll

[0:04:29] Voice 5: review the legislative process to amend the bylaws a little bit of what the chair has talked about.

[0:04:38] Voice 5: So this is the top priority project of the Gambier LTC. The project was initiated by the LTC for

[0:04:44] Voice 5: for three main reasons.

[0:04:46] Voice 5: The OTP and LUD for Keats Island are almost 20 years old

[0:04:50] Voice 5: and are due to be reviewed and updated.

[0:04:53] Voice 5: And during the rezoning process of Keats Camp,

[0:04:56] Voice 5: a number of properties were identified

[0:04:57] Voice 5: as having non-conforming issues

[0:04:59] Voice 5: and other issues related to the foreshore.

[0:05:03] Voice 5: There's also been an increase in dock applications

[0:05:05] Voice 5: on the island, including properties

[0:05:07] Voice 5: that were not water access only.

[0:05:11] Voice 5: All the information on this page has been posted

[0:05:14] Voice 5: it to the web page which you see up there um so that includes any correspondence that we've seen

[0:05:22] Voice 5: that we've received from the community so far the proposed bylaws staff reports all that can be

[0:05:28] Voice 5: accessed on this webpage so this slide summarizes the brief summary of the work that's been done

[0:05:38] Voice 5: date uh you can see that the project was started in 2017 so it's been a six-year process to get to

[0:05:46] Voice 5: this stage uh 2017 was really just the beginning um some reports to the ltc looking at some options

[0:05:56] Voice 5: in 2018 there was some community consultation two community meetings were held a survey went out

[0:06:05] Voice 5: and then in 2019 a working group was established to provide recommendations to the ltc

[0:06:10] Voice 5: and staff worked with the working group for a year.

[0:06:14] Voice 5: In May 2020, there was a discussion paper that was produced.

[0:06:19] Voice 5: Fall of 2020, recommendations from staff and working group

[0:06:22] Voice 5: were presented to the LTC and the LTC at that time directed staff

[0:06:26] Voice 5: to present, to draft some bylaws for consideration.

[0:06:32] Voice 5: 2021, the staff drafted bylaws.

[0:06:36] Voice 5: They were reviewed by the LTC.

[0:06:37] Voice 5: Amendments were made.

[0:06:40] Voice 5: and then in

[0:06:41] Voice 5: the spring of 2021 LTC reviewed draft bylaws and early referrals were sent to First

[0:06:46] Voice 5: Nations at that time the bylaws were given first reading in July of 2021 and formal referrals were

[0:06:57] Voice 5: sent out in the fall of 2021 there was two community information meetings and then November

[0:07:05] Voice 5: 2021 there was changes made to the bylaws they were given first reading again as amended

[0:07:10] Voice 5: it because there was some changes made the island stress was then again required to refer out to

[0:07:17] Voice 5: first nations so there was a referral that went out uh there was some concerns from first nations

[0:07:23] Voice 5: regarding the amendments that were were made particularly when the setback was changed from

[0:07:30] Voice 5: 15 meters back to seven and a half meters for building setback so staff met with squamish at

[0:07:35] Voice 5: that time discussed proposed changes in rationale remember that brought us to september of 2022

[0:07:42] Voice 5: bylaws were given second reading as amended so there was changes at that time so that was almost

[0:07:48] Voice 5: a year ago to reflect changes in dock sizes the dock sizes were increased at that time

[0:07:54] Voice 5: following that there's a community information meeting and since then it's been a bit of a pause

[0:08:00] Voice 5: the new LTC was elected and they rescinded the move to public hearing so we were actually going

[0:08:09] Voice 5: to go to public hearing earlier but the LTC's pulled back so we're here again with the community

[0:08:15] Voice 5: information meeting just to review the process and the bylaws and then after that we'll see

[0:08:21] Voice 5: where the LTC wants to go. We'll just talk a little bit about the current level of protection

[0:08:31] Voice 5: for the shoreline so this is what's currently in the land use bylaw that's that we use today

[0:08:37] Voice 5: so retaining walls are not permitted in the setback from the natural boundary of the sea

[0:08:41] Voice 5: the current setback regulations for building constructions from the natural boundary of the

[0:08:46] Voice 5: seven and a half meters except for platforms less than 10 meters in floor area a permitted

[0:08:54] Voice 5: boat house pump utility house and stairs or walkways required to access the foreshore

[0:09:00] Voice 5: You'll see the marine conservation zones are circled in orange here

[0:09:05] Voice 5: and does not permit any permanent buildings or structures of any kind in that area.

[0:09:13] Voice 5: So I just wanted to include a brief slide here. This is not an exhaustive list but this is

[0:09:18] Voice 5: some of what. So there's many factors that go into the LTC decision making process.

[0:09:23] Voice 5: Community or public input is just one source of input that the decision makers are asked

[0:09:28] Voice 5: to consider. They are also asked to look at relevant legislation, the island's trust policy

[0:09:33] Voice 5: statement, legal opinion, First Nations perspectives, public input, and then input from

[0:09:38] Voice 5: professionals, biologists,

[0:09:40] Voice 1: geoscientists, planners. So we'll get

[0:09:48] Voice 5: into the proposed bylaw. So bylaw 153,

[0:09:52] Voice 5: which is the bylaw to amend the official community plan. And it includes just the minor updates to

[0:09:58] Voice 5: the local government act sections it establishes a new shoreline development permit area for the

[0:10:04] Voice 5: purpose of protecting the natural environment its ecosystems biodiversity and for protecting

[0:10:10] Voice 5: development for positive conditions so this bylaw also would include the location so you have the

[0:10:17] Voice 5: text and the map and it would extend to all areas measured 15 meters upland from the present

[0:10:27] Voice 5: boundary of the from the present natural boundary of the sea and then 100 meters seaward from the

[0:10:33] Voice 5: natural boundary of the sea in

[0:10:40] Voice 1: the shoreline dpa

[0:10:41] Voice 5: these are some objectives and i won't read them

[0:10:45] Voice 5: all out but they're really just uh by the purpose or the reason for the dpa some of the reasons

[0:10:51] Voice 5: include uh focusing on the environment ecosystem uh balancing human use development and public youth

[0:10:59] Voice 5: recreation areas well balancing the ecological integrity and conservation of the shoreline and

[0:11:05] Voice 5: marine environment and then the last two focus on climate change the dpa aligns with the island's

[0:11:12] Voice 5: trust policy statement that strives to protect natural processes habitats and minimize impact

[0:11:19] Voice 5: to sensitive coastal environments so next i'll get into the proposed bylaw 154 which is the

[0:11:29] Voice 5: by-law that would have been the land use by-law and in this is where you're going to see the

[0:11:34] Voice 5: really specific guidelines that will regulate development. The OCP is kind of the overarching

[0:11:42] Voice 5: view and then the land use by-law would be the really specifics. So this the changes to the by-law

[0:11:51] Voice 5: would look at regulating the permanent structures within the natural setback from the boundary of

[0:11:58] Voice 5: feet to a platform of maximum of five meters squared and a set of stairs or walkways for

[0:12:05] Voice 5: the purpose of accessing the shore so it's a 10 meter squared currently so it'll be reducing that

[0:12:09] Voice 5: to five meters squared increasing the setbacks between existing docks to 10 meters from

[0:12:15] Voice 5: from 10 meters to five meters which is consistent with the provincial best practices and the

[0:12:23] Voice 5: Navajo Waters Act. And then it

[0:12:25] Voice 5: also reduces the maximum flow area of private docks and shared

[0:12:30] Voice 5: docks. So currently the setback is being left, the building setback is being left at seven and a half

[0:12:37] Voice 5: meters. It is one of the smallest in the Islands Trust area. This setback was adopted from a

[0:12:44] Voice 5: previous 1974 bylaw. So it's not considered best practice. And we have heard some concerns from

[0:12:51] Voice 5: impersonations that the seven and a half setback is not sufficient it's often where archaeological

[0:12:57] Voice 5: sites are found and a 15 to 30 meter setback is generally recommended for new development

[0:13:03] Voice 5: however in this current proposed bylaw it is seven and a half meters so the bylaw the development

[0:13:13] Voice 5: permit area and the bylaw will also have a section on applicability there's an exception on

[0:13:19] Voice 5: on exemptions and guidelines.

[0:13:28] Voice 1: So I'll go over some of these

[0:13:32] Voice 5: activities that would not require a development permit. So

[0:13:35] Voice 5: this isn't all of them. But this is some

[0:13:38] Voice 4: of the main ones that

[0:13:39] Voice 4: are listed here. And if there's any specific questions on any of

[0:13:45] Voice 4: these, we can get to that at the end of the

[0:13:47] Voice 5: presentation, but I

[0:13:48] Voice 5: won't be the follow up. And then the next section of the

[0:13:54] Voice 5: development permit area talks about the general guidelines,

[0:13:57] Voice 5: guidelines for constructions of docks and ramps, guidelines for shoreline modifications,

[0:14:04] Voice 5: guidelines for vegetation management, restoration, and enhancement, and then

[0:14:07] Voice 4: also for subdivision.

[0:14:13] Voice 4: So I'll walk you through the development permit

[0:14:15] Voice 5: application process a little bit.

[0:14:18] Voice 5: If adopted, all areas within that development permit area require a development permit or DP

[0:14:24] Voice 5: for applicable activities. Only exempted activities are not required to get a development permit.

[0:14:31] Voice 5: Activities outside of the development permit area would also not be required to get a development permit.

[0:14:35] Voice 5: So the landowner would submit their application with the required documentation, application form, title, site survey, and any other supplemental information.

[0:14:48] Voice 5: Currently, the fee for a development permit is $1,020.

[0:14:52] Voice 5: dollars and dp applications typically take three to four months to process possibly longer depending

[0:15:00] Voice 5: on the complexity of the application staff resources ltc meeting times there is no notification

[0:15:07] Voice 5: no public notification process for a dp the ltc considers the application and issues the dp

[0:15:15] Voice 5: based on whether it complies with the permit guidelines or not so it is not discretionary

[0:15:20] Voice 5: the LTC is required to issue the permit

[0:15:23] Voice 1: if it meets the guidelines. And then I guess one last

[0:15:31] Voice 5: thing is that the issued permit is valid for two years from the date of issuance. So construction

[0:15:37] Voice 5: or work would need to be started within that two-year period. So this slide shows a seven

[0:15:47] Voice 5: and a half meter setback from the natural boundary and then the 15 meter setback,

[0:15:53] Voice 5: the 15 meter DPA area. So you can see the deck is right up to the seven and a half meter line,

[0:16:01] Voice 5: the deck on the corner there. So if the landowner wanted to repair some rotten boards,

[0:16:05] Voice 5: this would not require a DP. If they were going to remove the deck, it would require a DP and

[0:16:11] Voice 5: any expansion of the footprint of the deck would require a DP. Here, the landowner wants to do an

[0:16:20] Voice 5: addition outside of the dpa area so it's not an issue a dp is not required

[0:16:24] Voice 4: this would require a dp

[0:16:32] Voice 4: so it's within that that uh 15 meter dpa area so if someone was increasing the

[0:16:42] Voice 5: height of their

[0:16:42] Voice 5: building keeping the same footprint uh they're outside the seven and a half meter setback but

[0:16:48] Voice 5: within the 15 meter dpa they would require a dp as an addition or an alteration to the building

[0:16:58] Voice 5: so this is just an example you can imagine someone wants to replace their septic so there'd be no

[0:17:05] Voice 5: need for a variance as a septic is not considered a structure so even though it's it's being built

[0:17:13] Voice 5: inside that seven and a half meter partially in the seven and a half meters they wouldn't need

[0:17:17] Voice 5: a variance and you would still need a development permit application because you're within

[0:17:23] Voice 1: the dpa

[0:17:24] Voice 1: area. So

[0:17:30] Voice 5: this is just a little bit about the legislative process. The blue steps identify

[0:17:36] Voice 5: the completed milestones, the green is where we currently are, and the gray identifies the

[0:17:42] Voice 5: potential next steps or milestones in the process. So as Chair Luckham mentioned, today's not a

[0:17:49] Voice 5: public hearing. A public hearing will be scheduled at a later date. At this time, we're just here to

[0:17:54] Voice 5: present the bylaws uh after second reading they would we would still need to go to public hearing

[0:18:00] Voice 5: then there would be third reading of the bylaws then it goes to the executive committee islands

[0:18:06] Voice 5: trust executive committee to approve and then it gets referred to the minister and then the

[0:18:13] Voice 5: ltc comes back to the

[0:18:15] Voice 1: ltc and final review and adoption of the bylaws would happen

[0:18:23] Voice 4: so there has not been any

[0:18:24] Voice 5: amendments to these bylaws since the last community information

[0:18:27] Voice 5: information meeting um but if you have any any questions um feel free to ask them now you can

[0:18:36] Voice 5: ask them of me or you can ask them

[0:18:38] Voice 4: of your your local trustees thank

[0:18:45] Voice 1: you Marla for the presentation

[0:18:48] Voice 1: so questions your name for the record please uh Paul

[0:18:53] Voice 3: Millie and Keith's Landing uh Marla you made

[0:18:56] Voice 3: a comment about extension of lot lines and setback lot lines if you'd clarify that a little

[0:19:04] Voice 3: bit more i didn't catch what those changes were uh what sorry explain you're

[0:19:13] Voice 4: talking about float

[0:19:14] Voice 4: setbacks from the extended lot lines like what it's what's

[0:19:20] Voice 5: been what's changed

[0:19:22] Voice 5: when we're talking

[0:19:22] Voice 5: about the

[0:19:22] Voice 3: 10 meter platform i don't know i'm confused about that you made a reference to it

[0:19:27] Voice 3: and i didn't catch what the the changes were or what it's supposed to be so

[0:19:34] Voice 5: what are you talking

[0:19:34] Voice 5: about what's currently allowed in the seven and a half meter setback which right

[0:19:39] Voice 3: now the extension

[0:19:40] Voice 3: of the lock lines that go out into the water at least i'm thinking that's what you were talking

[0:19:46] Voice 3: about that the dpa

[0:19:49] Voice 5: area goes 100 meters seaward no okay

[0:19:52] Voice 4: sorry i'm sorry i don't mind asking you

[0:19:56] Voice 4: about because we've talked about the setback from the extension how far the dogs have to get apart

[0:20:03] Voice 4: oh okay how far in from the plot lines when they're extended they they have to be 10 meters

[0:20:12] Voice 4: apart according to this bylaw it's

[0:20:17] Voice 5: proposed by law they would be 10 meters apart the floats would be

[0:20:20] Voice 5: 10 meters apart floats would be 10 meters apart and the like how far it's like that back from the

[0:20:25] Voice 5: lot fine is there

[0:20:28] Voice 6: a minimum or can it go right to the line if your neighbor's float is 30 feet away

[0:20:33] Voice 6: you have

[0:20:37] Voice 4: the

[0:20:39] Voice 6: water lot so is there a setback for where your float can be or can you put it right

[0:20:46] Voice 6: up to the line all

[0:20:49] Voice 3: right i think so you made a reference to it and i didn't understand it

[0:20:53] Voice 3: now i realized going back a few minutes yeah

[0:20:56] Voice 5: that's okay i'm

[0:20:56] Voice 4: just wrapping my head around it

[0:20:57] Voice 4: um this

[0:21:13] Voice 1: actually i suppose

[0:21:15] Voice 4: it would be i

[0:21:19] Voice 5: would want to look into this a little bit more but i

[0:21:21] Voice 5: would imagine that it would be the same that sideline setbacks that a structure would be

[0:21:27] Voice 5: subject to but i would i would just need to i would need to dig into the bylaws not explicitly

[0:21:34] Voice 5: listed here doesn't

[0:21:38] Voice 4: natural resources have a restriction on that if you go to the front

[0:21:43] Voice 4: counter and get a knockout location five meters projected i think

[0:21:53] Voice 1: we may need to

[0:21:55] Voice 2: see clarity

[0:21:55] Voice 4: because

[0:21:56] Voice 2: it does strike me that the setbacks are the terrestrial setbacks yeah

[0:22:05] Voice 4: on the land and

[0:22:07] Voice 2: indeed as the other gentleman here mentioned that technically that's a crown lease area or an area

[0:22:15] where you can have a public dock and I think that the you know sort of there's a um sort of a

[0:22:21] accepted practice that a dock doesn't extend in front of somebody else's property but or within

[0:22:30] their view core or sort of

[0:22:31] Voice 2: typically out of a courtesy but I don't think there's necessarily

[0:22:35] Voice 2: a restriction as somebody asks whether or not that dock could be on straight line um

[0:22:44] Voice 2: not everything is a right angle remember that right that um and so a line out a shoreline

[0:22:51] Voice 2: that doesn't obstruct a neighboring property's view but i think what marla's indicated that

[0:22:58] Voice 2: they needed to be 30 meters apart so indeed if one was on let's say the walk line extension

[0:23:03] Voice 2: then the next one would have to be 30 meters 10 meters and

[0:23:07] Voice 5: sorry i do have an answer to your

[0:23:09] Voice 5: question um so currently private floats and docks shall be located within the c word boundary of the

[0:23:16] Voice 5: upland property three meters from the projection of those long lines and it's being changed to five

[0:23:21] Voice 5: meters so i think you so you were right yeah five years and

[0:23:26] Voice 4: that's a clarification you say

[0:23:27] Voice 4: like projection of the wild line so same angle whatever it is

[0:23:32] Voice 1: right yeah yeah yeah

[0:23:42] Voice 1: yeah okay but

[0:23:47] Voice 4: try not to put it i think the assumption here is that every dock is it actually

[0:23:52] Voice 4: has to be it has to be on the land you know it's going to connect to the land so where it connects

[0:23:58] Voice 4: there right now it has to be uh not more than three meters from the property line of your neighbor

[0:24:05] Voice 4: and what i understand marvelous to be saying is it will then become five meters and

[0:24:13] Voice 4: And that's where you measure the 30-meter distance to the next dock.

[0:24:18] Voice 4: Sorry, the 10-meter distance to the next dock.

[0:24:21] Voice 4: And the dock, it's assumed, I guess, that the dock, like where the head of the dock lands on the shore,

[0:24:30] Voice 4: right now it's got to be three meters, it's got to be five meters,

[0:24:33] Voice 4: and that will continue forward towards 100 meters seaworthy.

[0:24:37] Voice 5: Is that right?

[0:24:37] Voice 5: And that's not an island trust.

[0:24:39] Voice 5: trust well it will be an island trust regulation but that also comes from the navigable waters

[0:24:43] Voice 5: protection act i'm

[0:24:45] Voice 3: confused again are we talking floats or are we talking land connections

[0:24:52] Voice 4: it would be both i got the impression that joe was talking about docks not floats yeah i was

[0:25:04] Voice 4: talking about both that's what i was talking about but the float is going to be attached to

[0:25:10] Voice 4: that dock so imagine are you imagining a situation where you've got the dock that goes out a certain

[0:25:17] Voice 4: distance and the float

[0:25:18] Voice 3: might be wider than the dock you're talking about docks that are five

[0:25:21] Voice 3: feet wide you could be dealing with a float that's 30 feet wide it's important to understand this

[0:25:28] Voice 3: because the shoreline is not straight line and so it's it's not the structure it's the area that

[0:25:35] Voice 3: you

[0:25:36] Voice 4: um when you're applying for the doc permit it's the area that you're for short lease or

[0:25:43] Voice 4: whatever you call it it's actually a shape that you put on with um very specific uh

[0:25:51] Voice 4: coordinates it's not the structure as long as you stay within the

[0:25:54] Voice 4: structure or within the

[0:25:56] Voice 4: the least area

[0:25:57] Voice 5: that's fine yeah the violence speaks to the private floats and dots

[0:26:01] Voice 5: and then a

[0:26:04] Voice 4: structure

[0:26:04] Voice 5: would be the

[0:26:06] Voice 4: rank so is there a difference between what uh you know the

[0:26:10] Voice 4: observations that made the dock is going to be narrower in most cases than the float so i was

[0:26:16] Voice 4: well what do you mean by ram what do you mean by dogs that's

[0:26:25] Voice 1: what i mean

[0:26:26] Voice 4: the structure that the work part that secures to the landing walk along to get to your club

[0:26:35] Voice 4: call that the ramp

[0:26:37] Voice 1: ramp dock

[0:26:38] Voice 4: dock ramp

[0:26:40] Voice 4: the video on Marlis

[0:26:42] Voice 4: when it gets to the float part of this

[0:26:44] Voice 4: does the float have to be within

[0:26:48] Voice 4: that

[0:26:49] Voice 4: in the future within that

[0:26:51] Voice 4: five meter dip

[0:26:52] Voice 4: okay so if your float's going to

[0:26:56] Voice 4: be almost always wider

[0:26:58] Voice 4: than the dock that means that

[0:26:59] Voice 4: where the dock ramp

[0:27:01] Voice 4: attaches to the land

[0:27:03] Voice 4: it's going to have to be even further

[0:27:06] Voice 4: within on the setback so the flow can be a setback requirement is that right yeah yeah it's all of

[0:27:12] Voice 4: the structure so paul does that clarify your

[0:27:15] Voice 3: the question you're asking i think so i've my concern

[0:27:20] Voice 3: is it just ain't workable in my neighborhood

[0:27:23] Voice 4: and why

[0:27:25] Voice 4: is that because we got 50 foot wide locks

[0:27:27] Voice 4: and the shorelines are not straight and there's rocks so positioning a dock

[0:27:38] Voice 3: a float is dictated by the shoreline and the geography not by your regulations

[0:27:47] Voice 3: so

[0:27:50] Voice 5: the option would always be available and i don't know if i already mentioned this in the

[0:27:53] Voice 5: presentation but to apply for a development variance permit so in situations where the

[0:27:59] Voice 5: the lots are unique, that would be a good time to apply for a development variance

[0:28:05] Voice 4: permit and that

[0:28:06] Voice 4: would give you the option to vary the bylaw. And I don't know on the provincial side.

[0:28:15] Voice 4: Quick follow-up to that, because I'm under the Kitsilinna area as well.

[0:28:18] Voice 4: I think as you approach this bylaw, you have to take into consideration what it means.

[0:28:24] Voice 4: in these places that have existed since like the late 30s, 40s, right?

[0:28:30] Voice 4: And so now you're moving into a situation where you can apply for a variance permit,

[0:28:35] Voice 4: but it's already there.

[0:28:38] Voice 4: We already have water access.

[0:28:40] Voice 4: We need this bylaw to be respectful of what's there and what we actually need to accomplish

[0:28:47] Voice 4: and not have to go through a variance application in order to do something that's practical and necessary.

[0:28:55] Voice 4: So, you know, I would ask that that be considered, this is a colossal amount of work that you've gone to, and come to the end of the line and grow our entire community into a position where everyone has to come for the development of variance planning, that's what makes sense.

[0:29:14] Voice 5: And anything that's currently the thing would be legal non-performing, it would just be a full replacement, if you would like to go for a full replacement of the dock in the future?

[0:29:23] Voice 5: that wouldn't be a surprise and i i

[0:29:27] Voice 5: don't know because this some of these regulations are coming

[0:29:30] Voice 5: from you know other jurisdictions i don't i think you would have to also go through yeah

[0:29:35] Voice 5: i would

[0:29:35] Voice 4: ask that you could

[0:29:36] Voice 5: take a look at that yeah that's

[0:29:38] Voice 4: what i'm going to do here

[0:29:41] Voice 4: if you uh tell us your name and then i'll go sure my name was built it is

[0:29:53] Voice 4: uh william my name is gert shepard just following on the legal mark of farm

[0:30:00] Voice 4: My question on page for under legal conforming it says, if you discontinue use for a period of six months, but most people walk up and over come back and pay your six months.

[0:30:15] Voice 4: yeah that's so why is that.

[0:30:18] Voice 4: Is that in the I think you.

[0:30:20] Voice 4: this is in stock report page four under legal non-compliance so most of keith's landing was

[0:30:27] Voice 4: within the 50 meter setback yeah non-conforming if they just locked up i see how it can be

[0:30:38] Voice 5: interpreted that way that's it's not really the thing that you yeah it's not the intention that's

[0:30:44] Voice 5: more for things like if you're operating a a store say you have a commercial space in an area that

[0:30:50] Voice 5: is only zoned for residential but your legal non-conforming could close at that store

[0:30:57] Voice 4: no

[0:30:58] Voice 5: no i'm just giving an example of when this this particular regulation would be small

[0:31:02] Voice 5: but

[0:31:03] Voice 4: that distinction you're drawing though isn't in the language for regulation

[0:31:08] Voice 4: right so

[0:31:09] Voice 5: that legal non-conforming is it's uh in the local government act so it's higher it

[0:31:16] Voice 4: but i i wouldn't i i i what i meant with this this this uh losing the legally non-conforming status

[0:31:22] Voice 4: after six months of non-use you're qualifying that saying well that's

[0:31:28] Voice 4: for it's not intended to deal with these residential properties but that language isn't

[0:31:32] Voice 4: in the regulation that distinction isn't in the language of the proposed bylaw when we get this

[0:31:40] Voice 4: but whenever the last one is done you have to see it all confirmed officially the landing

[0:31:45] Voice 4: they all uh legal non-conforming reviews aren't we've also seen these people that it's not a term

[0:31:53] Voice 4: you've been planning so this is a very concerning area where it doesn't affect me but everyone

[0:32:00] Voice 4: that's on you keep slamming yeah i

[0:32:06] Voice 5: wouldn't interpret it as that use was anything though

[0:32:09] Voice 5: if someone's just the doc would still exist if you're not coming out of interpretation it's a

[0:32:17] Voice 5: matter of wording you're putting in the regulation what's not it's

[0:32:20] Voice 1: not in the

[0:32:20] Voice 5: regulation that comes

[0:32:21] Voice 5: from the local government act and that's when we're establishing legal non-conforming it's

[0:32:26] Voice 5: i'm

[0:32:28] Voice 4: just thinking is there something we can't to clarify this concern or remove it

[0:32:36] Voice 4: well i don't think we can you may be agreeable

[0:32:38] Voice 4: so it's more about clarity within that so is there anything we can add within that to make

[0:32:48] Voice 4: it clear to make the purpose i don't think we can take the stuff out but we can make it more

[0:32:54] Voice 4: clear to the groups why

[0:32:56] Voice 3: can you not take it well it's

[0:32:58] Voice 4: not part of the government

[0:32:59] Voice 5: yeah it's not in

[0:32:59] Voice 5: our bylaws this legal non-conforming it's it's not in our bylaws it's it's part of the local

[0:33:04] Voice 5: the local government act so

[0:33:05] Voice 4: it's but you see this is a six-month non-use uh losing the status legally

[0:33:14] Voice 4: on performing is that in the in the land act or is that something we're putting in no it's it's

[0:33:20] Voice 4: in the local government it's nothing it's not written in our bylaws all right and it's it's

[0:33:23] Voice 2: actually about a use not a structure

[0:33:26] Voice 4: yeah right so that's all the people who summer that's the point

[0:33:29] Voice 4: they're gone yeah you told me they're gone i know the house they're not performing they got

[0:33:34] Voice 4: people they have their periods all their pictures out there their houses are within seven and a half

[0:33:41] Voice 4: meters like there's lots of houses that are completely non-conformist yeah but that structure

[0:33:47] Voice 3: doesn't change but if it's not used for six months yeah

[0:33:52] Voice 4: it will always be legally well it doesn't say

[0:33:57] Voice 3: that it's

[0:33:57] Voice 4: not actually what we're hearing what we're hearing is that it's six months of non-use

[0:34:01] Voice 4: means it's it loses this legally the distinction of saying well with somebody's house nobody's

[0:34:08] Voice 4: going to be so unreasonable as to kick somebody out or declare that place he's demolished

[0:34:15] that's an interpretive exercise but that's not unless documented as a policy

[0:34:21] Voice 4: question what i'm

[0:34:22] Voice 4: hearing that might be something that should be worked into the bylaw to make clear that it's not

[0:34:28] Voice 4: to be a matter of subjective interpretation it's worked into the bylaw it's not going

[0:34:33] Voice 4: the island's trust will not interpret that as applying

[0:34:38] Voice 4: to these resort or uh seasonal uh problems that language could be applied by lives

[0:34:45] Voice 4: but i understand that but people what i'm hearing is people leave the comfort of knowing

[0:34:57] Voice 4: that the provincial legislation isn't going to be applied in a rigid and inflexible way

[0:35:07] that is going to be interpreted by the honest trust in

[0:35:11] Voice 4: a way that allows people to actually

[0:35:12] Voice 4: carry on living with their seasonal properties without risk of health.

[0:35:17] Voice 4: Is it possible we could get a little bit of payment?

[0:35:20] Voice 4: I just can't see a situation

[0:35:22] Voice 2: where this would be...

[0:35:23] Voice 2: This isn't the only place the risk would happen.

[0:35:26] Voice 2: And so nationwide and provincial-wide, this

[0:35:30] Voice 4: is not an unusual situation.

[0:35:34] Voice 4: It's unusual for us.

[0:35:37] Voice 4: So it's unusual for us.

[0:35:40] Voice 5: So I'm also reading here that there's legal nonconforming status that's not impacted by the discontinuation of uses which are associated with seasonal or agricultural practices.

[0:35:51] Voice 4: And that is located where?

[0:35:53] Voice 4: so this this was an interpretation but um it's

[0:36:03] Voice 5: in it's in the local government act

[0:36:06] Voice 4: so if it's in the local government act just for abundance of clarity

[0:36:10] Voice 4: if we recapitulated that language or some version of that language in the bylaw

[0:36:14] Voice 4: that would cover people's concerns can we do that we could we use we typically don't duplicate um

[0:36:24] Voice 4: um because it's you know this we could provide clarity but we wouldn't want to do that we don't

[0:36:29] because the legislation could change yeah and we then we would have to change that violence

[0:36:34] okay

[0:36:34] Voice 4: thank you um you are into the like the introductory session section of the LCP which

[0:36:45] Voice 4: is full of all sorts of content and things about that nature that are there um if you could sort

[0:36:52] Voice 4: this clear because i i've never considered this anybody ever thought that to black but that you

[0:36:59] can make it understood that a lot of it is seasonally used i mean

[0:37:03] Voice 4: that's normal practice

[0:37:05] Voice 4: sometimes people go away for a year or that's not just anyway you might want i i i'd ask

[0:37:12] Voice 4: until i see us a very small amendment to the introductory sections of the lcp which would

[0:37:20] Voice 4: make that abundant permanent

[0:37:21] Voice 5: apparently well we can reference the local government act because

[0:37:25] Voice 5: it's very explicit in here that it would not because non-conforming use is not impacted by

[0:37:32] Voice 5: seasonal uses yeah good can you read that again just for clarity yeah so it says um the use

[0:37:40] Voice 5: the use of land building or other structure for seasonal uses or for agricultural purposes is

[0:37:47] Voice 5: not discontinued

[0:37:48] Voice 4: as a result of normal seasonal or agricultural processes practices so i didn't

[0:37:55] Voice 4: reference that specifically just mark it and then we'll put something

[0:38:00] Voice 4: good just to make it clear

[0:38:02] Voice 4: hi uh trish kelly and um i'm probably eastbourne um i have two questions one is um a lot of the

[0:38:11] Voice 4: lots in particular about keith's landing and eastbourne um some of the lots are incredibly

[0:38:17] Voice 4: incredibly small some of them are actually even smaller than a city lot some of them are only

[0:38:23] Voice 4: 5 000 square feet um so like you said before the most of their dwellings are actually in

[0:38:31] Voice 4: the setback area and so with a lot of them are like built a long time ago it's something like

[0:38:39] Voice 4: somebody else said so it basically anything somebody's doing to their like they obviously

[0:38:46] Voice 4: they want to like they want to add on they want to redo the foundation whatever or something

[0:38:52] Voice 4: actually happens to their structure like burns down or something they have to apply for that

[0:38:59] Voice 4: development permit application as well as building permits is that right yeah okay and so if like

[0:39:06] Voice 4: with setbacks from the road setbacks from the sea all of that if it's deemed that there really

[0:39:11] Voice 4: isn't a place for

[0:39:12] Voice 5: the structure to be built how does that work that would be a really good

[0:39:17] Voice 5: candidate for a variance permit okay okay so another thing yeah and

[0:39:21] Voice 4: then the other thing was

[0:39:22] Voice 4: in regards to septic so there are a lot of properties that um in the past have not been

[0:39:30] Voice 4: able to have septics so they have been going along with um usually out of houses uh some people

[0:39:38] Voice 4: actually have their great water and who knows what going right into the ocean and composting

[0:39:45] Voice 4: toilets so now with technology there have been huge advances in septic systems and basically

[0:39:52] Voice 4: every property I've been told from septic companies that they can provide septic systems for

[0:39:59] Voice 4: these properties and so right now a lot of these places that were in the past seemed not able to

[0:40:05] Voice 4: have septic systems or getting those so um yeah they're very expensive but a lot of people really

[0:40:12] Voice 4: want to be environment like they you know think we all love our island and stuff and they are

[0:40:16] Voice 4: spending the money and getting these systems put in so are you saying now they have to get not only

[0:40:23] Voice 4: do they have to go through uh coastal health for a permit but they also have to get a development

[0:40:28] Voice 4: permit too if they were within that 15 meters yeah so

[0:40:32] Voice 4: how will that work so they will because

[0:40:35] Voice 4: Because right now, if you just want to upgrade your subject, you don't have to go through you guys.

[0:40:41] Voice 4: They just apply to Coastal Health.

[0:40:43] Voice 5: Yeah. So once you've filed with Coastal Health, you get the accepted.

[0:40:48] Voice 5: Yeah.

[0:40:48] Voice 5: You could do it concurrently or you could do it after and then you would apply.

[0:40:51] Voice 4: So Coastal

[0:40:51] Voice 5: Health will tell you guys that.

[0:40:53] Voice 5: You would just submit. That would be part of the documentation that you would submit.

[0:40:56] Voice 5: You just get, I think, a stamp.

[0:40:57] Voice 5: People have to add the

[0:40:58] Voice 4: extra fees and stuff.

[0:41:00] Voice 4: But would that be the development permit?

[0:41:01] Voice 4: yeah and with the development permit they have to do that the environmental assessment and all that

[0:41:07] Voice 4: kind of stuff too so it's going to be harder and

[0:41:11] Voice 5: you need to make sure that you're meeting the

[0:41:13] Voice 5: guidelines of the development permit yes yeah especially

[0:41:18] Voice 4: when it comes to septic i think you

[0:41:22] Voice 4: guys should be absolutely doing everything you can to help and support these properties to get

[0:41:29] Voice 4: septic systems that are within the uh environmental because like not kidding you'd be shocked at how

[0:41:38] Voice 4: many do not have yeah like so so and and like i say like they don't have a choice there's like

[0:41:45] Voice 4: you can go here or here you know and and in the past they didn't they don't have a place

[0:41:50] Voice 4: so are so there's not gonna be any exception like uh like i would suggest that there should

[0:41:58] Voice 4: should be some sort of a thing where maybe the fees could be waived or something if it's something

[0:42:02] Voice 4: in regards to that because that's not like a uh you know a thing where well i just want a bigger

[0:42:07] Voice 4: deck because i want to see the sunrise or whatever this is like a health hazard like this is something

[0:42:13] Voice 4: that's going to actually impact the environment and trish did you get clarified are you basically

[0:42:19] Voice 4: saying if you go to coastal health and you get the green light for yeah to upgrade right your

[0:42:26] Voice 4: Your septic system.

[0:42:27] Voice 4: So the health authority is saying, yes, that's the only thing you're going to do.

[0:42:31] Voice 4: Yeah, that's true.

[0:42:31] Voice 4: What I'm hearing you're asking, you're saying is, why do we have to go through the development permit application,

[0:42:37] Voice 4: opening up the $1,000, and go through all that routine,

[0:42:40] Voice 4: when the essential approval that's required for health purposes has already been granted?

[0:42:48] Voice 4: Yes.

[0:42:49] Voice 4: Currently, that's how it works.

[0:42:50] Voice 4: it would only be an extraneous consideration other things like environmental impact or whatnot

[0:42:57] Voice 4: and you're saying i'm hearing you say at least that uh improving a septic system should be

[0:43:06] Voice 4: kind of a given that it's like yeah it's an it's actually an environmental improvement yes

[0:43:11] so you're saying what you just exempt that category yes

[0:43:15] Voice 4: development exactly from the

[0:43:17] Voice 4: being the need to apply for a permit exactly yeah right i mean it's something that the ltc

[0:43:23] Voice 4: could look

[0:43:23] Voice 5: into the lpc could look into waiving the fee or having a reduced fee but still requiring

[0:43:28] Voice 5: a development permit that you still are making to assure that the development i

[0:43:34] Voice 5: just know if

[0:43:35] Voice 4: you

[0:43:36] Voice 4: have a i don't know what coastal health requires but if coastal health has a permitting system of

[0:43:42] Voice 4: its own why would we need to double up on it well they're looking at different things they'd be

[0:43:47] Voice 4: be looking at mostly i'm assuming like a

[0:43:49] Voice 4: real health these are usually

[0:43:52] Voice 4: engineered systems and

[0:43:55] Voice 4: usually the just to actually get a plan drawn up and um because they're always custom get a plan

[0:44:01] Voice 4: drawn up and designed and filed with coastal health and then they look at it and go yeah

[0:44:07] Voice 4: this is engineered stamped and approved it costs five thousand dollars just to get that it's just

[0:44:14] Voice 4: the piece of paper with an approval and that costs $5,000. And then on top of it, that doesn't

[0:44:19] Voice 4: include the actual system itself. And a system like that is usually around $60,000. I know

[0:44:24] Voice 4: somebody right now who just did one that costs well over $100,000. So, you know, so that's why

[0:44:31] Voice 4: I'm just saying is that they're like really expensive things. So even if somebody can save

[0:44:37] Voice 4: a thousand dollars or fifteen hundred dollars or whatever it is it's going to help them be able to

[0:44:44] Voice 4: afford to do this so marla's what what would in a situation like that coastal health is permitted or

[0:44:52] Voice 4: randomly permit for the septic upgrade what added value would our review do

[0:44:59] Voice 4: uh when it's within the dpa then to get for the dpa permitting system well

[0:45:05] Voice 5: it would be looking

[0:45:06] Voice 5: at all the guidelines that are are listed so it would be looking at the you know environmental

[0:45:10] Voice 5: how many trees are getting removed um how close to the water is it how you know just giving the

[0:45:18] Voice 5: ltc kind of that extra layer of protection but um you know there's guidelines for vegetation

[0:45:29] Voice 5: management restoration so environmental

[0:45:33] Voice 4: considerations and then i do think if it

[0:45:40] Voice 4: was being built really close to shoreline that might be something that the ltc would want to

[0:45:45] Voice 4: i was

[0:45:48] Voice 5: just saying if you know it would just be that the ltc has an extra layer of protection

[0:45:53] Voice 5: when people are applying for these septic upgrades so they're they're looking at they'd be looking at

[0:45:58] Voice 5: the proposal against the guidelines in the bylaw not necessarily different from what coastal health

[0:46:06] Voice 5: would be approved but it's it's really you know up to the ltc to decide but it

[0:46:14] Voice 6: still seems like

[0:46:15] Voice 6: an entirely unnecessary step yeah if it's approved then it's on the property um i don't know what

[0:46:23] Voice 6: you guys you know

[0:46:24] Voice 4: what we've got your point it's actually a very good point we need to think about

[0:46:27] Voice 4: this uh speaking just personally here without committing anybody anything i mean if it's

[0:46:34] Voice 4: possible to have a permitting system that is less onerous and just as effective then why wouldn't we

[0:46:41] Voice 4: do it but we have to i think for us to explore this one of the things we have to do at rm is

[0:46:47] Voice 4: dig in what the goal to help requirements are what goes into their permanent it turns out that their

[0:46:52] Voice 4: permitting process essentially covers most of the concerns that the trust would be concerned about

[0:46:59] Voice 4: the bylaws intended to get at then maybe yeah you need to tweak the language to create an exemption

[0:47:06] Voice 4: for that or to create an exemption or setting up grades that meet certain standards for example

[0:47:12] Voice 4: they have to be within the setbacks of august uh but made a very good point we need to drill

[0:47:20] Voice 4: into it to figure out if if there's something we can and should do about it because also like

[0:47:25] Voice 4: Like in order to get a building permit with SCRV, you have to have a plan for your septic

[0:47:31] Voice 4: system.

[0:47:32] Voice 4: You're not allowed to have a composting toilet or an outhouse anymore.

[0:47:36] Voice 4: So anybody who does want to do any building on any kind of permit like building want right

[0:47:42] Voice 4: now, like that is actually something that they have to actually do first, like report

[0:47:46] Voice 4: like they first they get a survey and get environmental assessment.

[0:47:50] Voice 4: And then the next thing they have to do is come up with a septic plan.

[0:47:54] Voice 4: and so you know so not only are they doing all that but then they also now have to go and get

[0:48:01] Voice 4: a dpa it deems that that's where the problem because a lot of times these lots are so small

[0:48:07] Voice 4: that it's literally like a jigsaw puzzle it's like okay so the road's here the setback the sea is

[0:48:13] Voice 4: here and people are trying to figure out to get a septic system and a structure in this little

[0:48:19] Voice 4: little tiny piece of land and then with that you have to also take into account there's rock

[0:48:25] Voice 4: there's you know trees there's soil and stuff so i just i just think that adding an extra layer

[0:48:32] Voice 4: with this permit thing is just going to really make it that much harder for people and i know

[0:48:37] Voice 4: that when you talk about doing that the permit is good for two years um island builds take

[0:48:43] Voice 4: take seriously forever like i have some properties that i list where i have to explain to other

[0:48:50] Voice 4: realtors and stuff that somebody started the build in like 2004 and didn't get final until like 2017

[0:48:57] Voice 4: as long as the

[0:48:59] Voice 5: construction is started within that two years okay so you don't have to

[0:49:03] Voice 5: it hasn't been completed

[0:49:05] Voice 4: just a comment that whenever there's there's challenging properties

[0:49:13] Voice 4: everywhere yeah and and keats has got very tiny lots so does mainland um sunshine coast so you've

[0:49:22] Voice 4: got equally small lots they've just implemented a 15 meter blanket setback all along the the

[0:49:30] Voice 4: sunshine coast everywhere so every all those houses are still within that dpa they are also

[0:49:36] Voice 4: having to look at that septic system issue when uh people come to build planning is allowed to

[0:49:46] Voice 4: sterilize the land meaning that there has to be a way to move forward and yes it may cost in some

[0:49:53] Voice 4: cases more money but it doesn't mean you cannot build it's it's allowing and making those um

[0:50:01] Voice 4: plans within the idea that yes somehow we're going to make this work and there will be some

[0:50:08] Voice 4: properties that are more challenging than others i mean there's going to be some areas where

[0:50:13] Voice 4: the septic system will not fit on a pile of rock so that's got to be engineered in a different way

[0:50:19] Voice 4: which can cost more money so if there is a way that we can coordinate this um but it's not unique

[0:50:27] Voice 4: it is many areas that are facing this kind of challenge based on modern septic systems and

[0:50:37] Voice 4: what is considered safe now based on what was considered safe 30 50 70 years ago so we're

[0:50:45] Voice 4: moving the gauge forward but we also are trying to accommodate the fact that people do live on

[0:50:52] Voice 4: these very small so I think there is a way forward it's just how to coordinate it so that you are

[0:51:00] Voice 4: paying double for the same basically essentially the same planning okay so basically I'm hearing

[0:51:10] Voice 4: then that nobody's going to be unreasonably denied putting in a septic system if it has if it's deemed

[0:51:17] Voice 4: that has to be in this area yeah they would work within that and make it and there there's a sense

[0:51:24] Voice 4: of reasonable so when the planning is done it's not like okay this is the way it is no question

[0:51:31] Voice 4: it's the same as when we had this discussion with um where the floats are or what is what is or

[0:51:38] Voice 4: is not considered seasonal and whether you have to lose the

[0:51:43] Voice 4: use of your dock because you're not

[0:51:44] Voice 4: there for six months there the rules and regulations are within a planning standard

[0:51:50] Voice 4: so that's that's where we're having to clarify that with the sense of reach and that's where

[0:51:58] Voice 4: the variance is coming because we like to know as a committee and this community when somebody

[0:52:03] Voice 4: starts digging know that the permits you know that that um your neighbor is doing what is okay to do

[0:52:12] Voice 4: and that helps the community in communications when they're like oh what's happening over there

[0:52:18] Voice 4: well we know that yes they've gone through a process we know that they're going to take the

[0:52:23] Voice 4: right things into consideration it just helps thank

[0:52:30] Voice 1: you for that question anybody else have

[0:52:34] Voice 4: some other questions actually i'm going to go to somebody who hasn't spoken yet directly

[0:52:38] Voice 2: oh i can

[0:52:41] Voice 4: week but yeah well my question is um thank you for the presentation as most people are pretty

[0:52:49] Voice 4: familiar with this whole program anyway my

[0:52:53] Voice 4: question actually is a slightly different one

[0:52:56] Voice 4: and i put a little context but my question is going to be is where are you at in your first

[0:53:01] Voice 4: nations consultation around this and the reason i

[0:53:03] Voice 4: asked that question in my eight years

[0:53:08] It was not an unusual scenario where you got way down the protest and

[0:53:14] Voice 4: right at the end,

[0:53:16] Voice 4: all of a sudden you heard from the whole First Nation saying, oh, we have a lot of issues.

[0:53:26] Voice 4: And I know this, for example, just happened on Galliano Day for a public hearing, etc,

[0:53:31] Voice 4: etc.

[0:53:32] Voice 4: And all of a sudden, an objection was raised.

[0:53:35] Voice 4: so i uh i heard marlis you saying that there was a uh discussion with the swanish uh

[0:53:44] is the this is their they're the main first nation in this area um and wondered if there

[0:53:51] have been any further or if there's any uh

[0:53:53] Voice 4: consultation and uh resolution around

[0:53:59] Voice 4: their issues around i would

[0:54:02] Voice 5: say that there hasn't been a resolution because

[0:54:05] Voice 5: they're not that excited with the seven and a half meter building setback

[0:54:09] Voice 4: so that's just

[0:54:10] Voice 4: where it stands at the moment but there's not a lot that we can

[0:54:16] Voice 5: offer we've explained the

[0:54:18] Voice 5: rationale behind it and um there's been a bit

[0:54:22] Voice 4: of back and forth

[0:54:22] Voice 4: but that's just where it is

[0:54:25] Voice 4: and it is there you know we hate people who are all in here protesting and have the ministry say

[0:54:33] Voice 4: say, we don't think you've consulted enough, which is also a very real possibility as you

[0:54:40] Voice 4: all say, we don't think you've consulted enough, we aren't going to approve your

[0:54:44] Voice 4: decision.

[0:54:47] Voice 4: I guess I'm wondering if you would consider whether we could do any further, you know,

[0:54:52] direct consultation with them and try and figure out if you could get at least an understanding

[0:55:01] or, again, thinking down the road, where you get to the point

[0:55:07] Voice 4: where you're writing

[0:55:08] Voice 4: deal with you then you can't because you know and i know part of it is why they're my perception

[0:55:17] Voice 4: probability for whatever we didn't get done but um from my point of view i'm wanting to see

[0:55:34] Voice 4: this be part of a larger engagement process with the gander local trust committee as a whole

[0:55:44] Voice 4: and i think there's other avenues with the the island's trust as a whole with some of the

[0:55:50] Voice 4: projects that we were hoping to take on this term that would help accommodate some of the concerns

[0:55:56] Voice 4: that the squash nation has or may have around setbacks and that you know primarily around

[0:56:05] Voice 4: archaeological heritage protections how could we accommodate that in a different way

[0:56:13] Voice 4: that's one area but there's so many points of connectivity to the squamish nation that we don't

[0:56:21] Voice 4: want to duplicate the the questions each time we're talking to them um because they're busy

[0:56:28] Voice 4: we're busy um so a way of coordinating the projects for instance canada's got their official

[0:56:34] Voice 4: community plan which which intersects with squamish um we have other projects on online

[0:56:41] Voice 4: line so that was going to be my hope of how we would work with those potential issues or ongoing

[0:56:53] Voice 4: disagreements in around the key sports and you know dan we talk about the sufficiency of

[0:57:01] Voice 4: consultation there's not much we can do about it if we put in a good faith effort to do the

[0:57:10] Voice 4: consultation that's required and the scourge nation disagrees at the end of the day and

[0:57:15] Voice 4: complains to the ministry about it well that's a choice they have to make they have to decide

[0:57:19] Voice 4: whether they care about it enough to do that but i think it's fair to say that the ldc you know

[0:57:27] Voice 4: through staff has done a pretty effective job of trying to consult and reaching out but

[0:57:36] Voice 4: uh they're in the responsiveness issue here as kate converted to it uh but they're busy over

[0:57:42] Voice 4: there too they got a lot happening and they have to prioritize the workload of their staff and the

[0:57:48] Voice 4: decision-making process and how important i mean they registered an objection to our cefax saying

[0:57:56] Voice 4: at 10.5 years uh what kind of priority that is for them uh we don't know uh relative to their

[0:58:06] Voice 4: other priorities all we can do is do our part in reaching out and they've been responsive to some

[0:58:13] Voice 4: extent but if they haven't been as engaged or responsive as we'd like so that we can feel

[0:58:19] Voice 4: comfortable to process well again there's not much we can do about that they're kind of in the driver's

[0:58:25] Voice 4: seat in to the extent of their responsiveness uh but uh the original bylaw contemplated 15 meter

[0:58:37] Voice 4: development limit that got pulled back for some very good reasons uh the community doesn't want

[0:58:43] Voice 4: that community wants to sit at 7.5 uh consultation doesn't always necessarily result in agreement

[0:58:52] Voice 4: So we'll just have to take it one step at a time.

[0:58:54] Voice 1: Thank you.

[0:59:00] Voice 4: Sure.

[0:59:04] Voice 4: On batch docs, if you have a one lot lease or a license,

[0:59:09] Voice 4: does that come into play?

[0:59:13] Voice 4: If you train your dog to stay within that designated area,

[0:59:23] Voice 4: but it doesn't need to be set up?

[0:59:25] Voice 4: If you're just doing some repairs, you wouldn't need to.

[0:59:27] Voice 4: let's say you lose it for whatever reason which

[0:59:31] Voice 6: so

[0:59:34] Voice 4: you would have to follow this is sort of the

[0:59:38] Voice 4: So you have a lot of these three pairs that have been blown.

[0:59:49] Voice 1: They're

[0:59:49] Voice 4: parallel processes.

[0:59:52] Voice 4: No, both in the books.

[0:59:54] Voice 4: They're basically registered on a table.

[0:59:56] Voice 4: They go in that space.

[1:00:00] Voice 4: that area but say under government can yeah yeah it would still be subject to the local bylaws

[1:00:13] Voice 4: i've been thinking about all the comments before but you put lots and uh the challenge that would

[1:00:19] Voice 4: be for dogs and of course we have to remind tall keys is no car ferries so it's boat access only

[1:00:27] Voice 4: it makes a lot of sense when you've got that many people that make small lots for people

[1:00:35] Voice 4: have shared dogs so if you have a shared dog situation i can't remember now but do the

[1:00:43] Voice 4: bylaws contemplate that if you have a shared dog situation those setbacks don't necessarily apply

[1:00:50] Voice 4: no the shared dogs are

[1:00:53] Voice 5: more about the size the maximum allowable load size and not about the

[1:00:58] Voice 5: setbacks so

[1:01:00] Voice 4: if you do have a i'm struggling here to think about whether or not there would be any

[1:01:07] Voice 4: practical regulatory reason to stay with those setback requirements when you actually have

[1:01:14] Voice 4: an agreement between two property owners they're going to share a dog

[1:01:18] Voice 4: it'd be no harm frankly to have the dog straddle the property uh because that's to the convenience

[1:01:25] of the homeowner or the property owners and it may be necessary if you want to if you want to

[1:01:30] maintain that uh 10

[1:01:33] Voice 1: meter distance between flows yeah

[1:01:41] Voice 4: well we'll make

[1:01:43] Voice 1: it we'll make it

[1:01:44] Voice 4: yeah

[1:01:45] Voice 2: i

[1:01:48] Voice 4: was going to say it must have come up before somewhere else it's not an unusual

[1:01:54] Voice 4: scenario it

[1:01:55] Voice 4: ends up being a community humanity and then the community

[1:01:58] Voice 4: many weeks well it

[1:02:02] Voice 5: would be in the restrictive covenant on those properties yeah

[1:02:06] Voice 4: but that's

[1:02:08] Voice 4: possible yeah well you know we'll have to look into that because uh you know paul you've raised

[1:02:14] Voice 4: a good point if you've got those narrow properties those setbacks uh don't necessarily work for for

[1:02:21] Voice 4: people need to have dogs on the other hand i can show you half a dozen we don't want 100 dogs

[1:02:26] Voice 4: with 50 foot spaces i mean that's just that's not going to happen yeah but i think people are

[1:02:31] Voice 3: being reasonable as neighbors and try it because more room the easier it is for everybody to use

[1:02:38] Voice 3: the float but the shoreline doesn't necessarily

[1:02:42] Voice 4: allow you to do that and can I ask a question

[1:02:45] Voice 4: about the community over the landing in terms is dog sharing a thing I mean do people are people

[1:02:51] Voice 4: working together and share their dogs that

[1:02:53] Voice 3: kind of thing I would say in our immediate area

[1:02:58] Voice 3: there's other people could speak to that here um breaking up agreements of dog sharing is more

[1:03:05] Voice 3: common than people coming together on because it comes with its own series of issues and then you

[1:03:13] Voice 3: get a change in ownership and the

[1:03:17] Voice 4: parties change and feelings are different so we've got a couple

[1:03:23] Voice 4: hands up here

[1:03:24] Voice 5: i actually have a clarification sorry i my law is in depth and um i don't have

[1:03:30] Voice 5: it all memorized but uh related to the five meter setback from the projection of the law

[1:03:36] Voice 5: lines this setback regulation does not apply to a shared thought boundary between residential lots

[1:03:41] Voice 5: that are provided by the same private floats i would not so

[1:03:45] Voice 4: it's already covered thank you

[1:03:47] Voice 4: this gentleman here

[1:03:48] Voice 2: and then the opposite still here anybody else after those two

[1:03:54] Voice 4: Scott Benson. I have two questions about the most increased setback on the two Portland lots. One is, our lot is any one of those district lots. Did that affect our project map?

[1:04:16] Voice 4: These are the outlets?

[1:04:17] Voice 4: 11. being our lab is block a of mr block seven seven and the wording is that this applies to

[1:04:29] Voice 4: this block eight seven six it means we are being doubtful not

[1:04:35] Voice 1: just important it was specifically

[1:04:45] Voice 1: i could i give

[1:04:58] Voice 5: you my card and i can just follow up with

[1:05:01] Voice 4: you on this just i want to have a closer

[1:05:02] Voice 4: If it goes by zoning, then we're okay to bring on in the same zone.

[1:05:08] Voice 4: But if it goes by description of district law, we are catching on.

[1:05:17] Voice 4: There you go.

[1:05:18] Voice 4: I've got one question.

[1:05:19] Voice 4: The other is, has any thought been given to increasing the setback to 15-meter-tall parcels

[1:05:30] Voice 4: just where the archaeologically or environmentally fragile,

[1:05:38] Voice 4: where it's just rocky cliff, there are no archaeological sites and

[1:05:47] Voice 4: there's nothing

[1:05:48] Voice 1: to erode, there's no soil.

[1:06:14] Voice 4: I don't know that the depth of study that's

[1:06:17] Voice 5: required to determine what areas would and

[1:06:20] Voice 5: wouldn't qualify have been done

[1:06:23] Voice 4: to really make a informed decision.

[1:06:26] Voice 4: to see health we brought to to change the setback or determine only those properties

[1:06:32] Voice 4: under undeveloped properties and consider after most of that are just

[1:06:49] Voice 4: there's nothing there's no need there's not nothing gained by increasing the setback

[1:06:55] Voice 4: just because the rest of the island is seven percent that it actually might go in place

[1:07:05] Voice 4: so anyways i'd like to see that considered and just in response to that um seven and a half

[1:07:17] Voice 4: is not considered optimum in in standard practice this is they're looking at 30 meters as a as a

[1:07:28] Voice 4: recommended standard but loan building um i know there's like words around down zone things like

[1:07:36] Voice 4: that it's more to do with protection it's not downside it's not a negative this is protecting

[1:07:45] Voice 4: your short lines in a very minimal way um i i would like to see personally wider setbacks on

[1:07:58] Voice 4: specific areas of one of the islands but to say that seven and a half meters

[1:08:04] Voice 4: is is where you want to be is not necessarily what is considered best practices in in planning so

[1:08:15] Voice 4: we're looking at trying to accommodate a very specific uh community uh development area the way

[1:08:24] Voice 4: it's a small island it's developed over very small lots that's your reality so we're trying

[1:08:31] Voice 4: to accommodate that with seven and a half meters not to say that seven and a half meters is where

[1:08:37] Voice 4: we really want to be it's 15 is minimal 30 is preferred so to say oh well you know this is a

[1:08:48] Voice 4: bad thing 50 meters is down zoning i'm not sure it's accurate it's just a level of protection

[1:08:56] Voice 4: and they're looking at the larger undeveloped lots on keys that's where there's an accommodation

[1:09:04] Voice 4: so it's just a way of looking at it but i think it's a question that's worth asking

[1:09:10] Voice 4: but personally that's where i've seen it compared to others if i could sit in here

[1:09:19] Voice 4: This issue of, with respect, Kate, best practices, it always makes me uncomfortable when I hear that term because it really doesn't explain much.

[1:09:32] Voice 4: Best practices, that's a generic or a general idea that more setback is better than less.

[1:09:41] Voice 4: Well, true, if you want to have an ecological preserve, it should be the whole thing.

[1:09:46] Voice 4: the reality is

[1:09:50] Voice 4: for this area

[1:09:51] Voice 4: that debate's basically

[1:09:53] Voice 4: kind of gone

[1:09:53] Voice 4: it was originally contemplated there was going to be

[1:09:57] Voice 4: a 15 year setback

[1:09:58] Voice 4: there was a lot of community objections

[1:10:02] Voice 4: the idea is that best practices

[1:10:03] Voice 4: and the idea of saying we prefer

[1:10:05] Voice 4: this as opposed to that

[1:10:07] Voice 4: I think our preference ought to be

[1:10:09] Voice 4: what works in a specific area

[1:10:11] Voice 4: what's the best thing

[1:10:14] Voice 4: in four keeps

[1:10:15] Voice 4: or what's the best thing for damn let's look at the specific geotechnical issues the specific

[1:10:22] Voice 4: community challenges and try to get to the right answer there may be places where it should be 50

[1:10:28] Voice 4: feet or it should be certain because there are things there that are worth preserving

[1:10:32] Voice 4: and it's relatively undisturbed the reality is key so it's it's uh all private land principally

[1:10:43] Voice 4: settled on the coast on the coast or you know on the shoreline area uh and we're dealing with a lot

[1:10:50] Voice 4: of historical development so you're looking at the likelihood that people are renovating major changes

[1:10:56] Voice 4: putting additions to the property that are already within that 15 meter area so if you impose a new

[1:11:03] Voice 4: 15 meter limitation you're creating a lot of friction for you know you can anticipate you're

[1:11:09] Voice 4: a lot of friction so yeah i wasn't arguing that i'm specifically wrong about the two properties

[1:11:16] Voice 4: that are undeveloped and i am interested in how that developed plot a fits into that

[1:11:24] Voice 4: it is a discussion you can have i'm just trying to understand that this this seven and a half meters

[1:11:34] Voice 4: is is is very small in compared to other planning areas and um you know putting that 15 meters just

[1:11:44] Voice 4: on those two that's the only thing i'm probably i understand seven and a half meters is where

[1:11:49] Voice 4: it's practical we had this discussion before uh where it's practical for keats given the way

[1:11:58] Voice 4: it's laid out with your historical so and i do get that it's just supposed to

[1:12:04] Voice 4: big properties that don't have that kind of as a point of verification barbara can you explain

[1:12:11] how it came to pass that those two properties have that 15 meter setback

[1:12:17] in distinction

[1:12:20] Voice 4: from the rest

[1:12:20] Voice 5: of the island i wasn't around at that time but i believe them

[1:12:25] Voice 5: because they're the only un-developed ones.

[1:12:28] Voice 5: I can tell you.

[1:12:29] Voice 5: Yeah,

[1:12:29] Voice 4: there's two things.

[1:12:30] Voice 4: All right.

[1:12:31] Voice 4: Well, can we have the answer at least?

[1:12:33] Voice 4: If you'd like the answer, I can tell you.

[1:12:34] Voice 4: I was there, and during one of the earlier CIMs,

[1:12:38] Voice 4: somebody made a very compelling argument.

[1:12:40] Voice 4: It was someone from Palm Grove who said,

[1:12:43] Voice 4: why don't you look at the areas that are undeveloped

[1:12:46] Voice 4: and want 15% back?

[1:12:48] And these are the ones that are apart.

[1:12:51] All the reasons you gave about historical settlement patterns

[1:12:56] and leave us at seven and a half so that we can get on and we don't have any problem and in fact

[1:13:03] i think that that particular argument i resonated

[1:13:07] Voice 6: with me and my co-op and my guessing

[1:13:09] Voice 6: but i

[1:13:11] Voice 4: decided to do that because there are these two very large undeveloped lots that

[1:13:16] Voice 4: i think are everybody would like to see in some way deserve to be all valued

[1:13:25] the center of the island, the compass, I don't know, a fifth of the shoreline on the island,

[1:13:32] maybe appreciating it slightly.

[1:13:35] Voice 4: And so that's how it came to be. And we thought, well,

[1:13:38] Voice 4: I actually think that's a good term. It just means that that's what the scientific consensus

[1:13:45] Voice 4: is. So that's how it came about. And I don't remember who it was that made that argument,

[1:14:00] Voice 4: I want to respect the gentleman

[1:14:04] Voice 2: who's been waiting for a while, who's going to go in

[1:14:07] Voice 2: the sequence of which people can't stop, and I'm going to recognize that this gentleman

[1:14:11] Voice 2: here.

[1:14:12] Voice 6: So, Bob Williams, Eastbourne.

[1:14:16] Voice 6: It's a question of language again, but I noticed

[1:14:20] Voice 4: in this process you mentioned the

[1:14:25] Voice 4: in the

[1:14:26] Voice 6: question of docks and more in the context of applications for new docks,

[1:14:33] Voice 6: that there's the aspect of water access only.

[1:14:39] Voice 6: Well, in my opinion, that's kind of a ridiculous term

[1:14:42] Voice 6: because in our context, the entire island, it's an island.

[1:14:48] Voice 6: It's water access only.

[1:14:51] Voice 6: So I think you need to think about using that term.

[1:14:54] Voice 6: you're looking puzzled by

[1:14:59] Voice 2: my answer you don't have ferry access is what we think of when we

[1:15:04] Voice 2: talk about water access okay

[1:15:06] Voice 6: well that's not defined

[1:15:07] Voice 2: but

[1:15:09] Voice 6: but the implication to me was

[1:15:11] Voice 6: if you wanted a dock off of your property but there was a dock a public dock on the island

[1:15:20] Voice 6: with a road that went past your house then you were uh less likely to have approvals for your

[1:15:27] Voice 6: application is that not the case i

[1:15:31] Voice 5: don't think that's well

[1:15:32] Voice 5: can you hear from us no it's not

[1:15:34] Voice 5: that would not be the case that's not written anywhere in the development permit guidelines

[1:15:37] Voice 5: i think i used that term in my presentation i just didn't say that but it's not

[1:15:43] Voice 4: water access

[1:15:51] Voice 4: yeah yeah question answer yeah thank you yeah and so also the term is you know wider islands

[1:15:58] Voice 4: trust and this did cause some confusion when there was some concerns for the policy statement

[1:16:02] Voice 4: was um water access um boat access ferry access yes we're all islands but some of us have car

[1:16:11] Voice 4: ferries yeah so that there was some move at looking at restricting dogs where car ferries

[1:16:18] Voice 4: were available and there are some islands that do restrict dogs because they have car ferries

[1:16:24] Voice 4: we don't have that we're always considered water access it's a different it's just a term that did

[1:16:31] Voice 4: come up and it was confusing but it never applied to the gander trust area so

[1:16:39] Voice 2: just for clarity

[1:16:41] Voice 2: there are islands that have car ferry access and there are lots that are inaccessible by a highway

[1:16:47] Voice 2: it or

[1:16:48] Voice 4: rogue of any kind they are also water access to turn it on that we've had and so sorry

[1:16:58] and that's i feel like you should have this i've got government but there are but

[1:17:03] Voice 4: there but you

[1:17:04] Voice 4: mean i'm sure there are a number of lots on the piece that are not that don't have room

[1:17:12] Voice 4: I've noticed the differentiation that I think Marlon and our series of ones don't have any

[1:17:22] Voice 4: period

[1:17:22] Voice 2: even if they're coming thank you I'm going to go back to my speakers this gentleman here

[1:17:28] Voice 2: his question is inspired okay um

[1:17:32] Voice 4: one of the things um that's kind of notable that I think a lot of

[1:17:35] Voice 4: people don't they're not they're not aware of is that it actually says in the bylaws and committee

[1:17:40] Voice 4: plan that all future development on keats island must be done in 10 acre parcels which means that

[1:17:46] Voice 4: the property that we are that everybody is talking about that has uh maybe an exemption or whatever

[1:17:53] Voice 4: would have to be developed in 10 acre parcels and also with that it would have to go through

[1:17:59] Voice 4: this whole development process and stuff and also somebody would have to design the actual

[1:18:05] Voice 4: lot lines it sucks right so in a sense they could manipulate and or modify the lot lines to

[1:18:13] Voice 4: accommodate whatever they thought would most make it more appealing or or whatever right in the old

[1:18:22] Voice 4: days when eastborn subdivision was done and i think even the cottagers it was the subdivision

[1:18:30] Voice 4: actually was done based on old logging roads and how many lots could they possibly get in

[1:18:39] Voice 4: using this footprint of old logging roads and whatever the terrain was um and they just kind

[1:18:46] Voice 4: of fit as many in and most of the

[1:18:49] Voice 4: lots in eastbourne are around a quarter acre but there's

[1:18:52] Voice 4: not there's some that are like shockingly there's one i pulled up the other day 4500 square feet i

[1:18:58] Voice 4: mean tiny right so yeah so it just seems like this one size fits all sort of blanket thing for the

[1:19:08] Voice 4: whole island um is different like it's like we've already built and that's the other thing is a lot

[1:19:15] Voice 4: of people think oh there's all these lots that haven't built on actually there's not there is

[1:19:19] Voice 4: literally a handful of lots right now on all of keith's i know when keith's landing i think

[1:19:27] Voice 4: there's a couple and there's a couple over on the cotton point area and there's one left in

[1:19:33] Voice 4: east fort one so now we're going to change it and then all those properties are going to have to

[1:19:38] Voice 4: have new um new rules or they're going to have to apply for an extra permit with all their building

[1:19:46] Voice 4: regulations but part of it is is that too with these lots is that their neighbors have already

[1:19:51] Voice 4: built so they have to try and build within that that's not imposing on neighbors either so they

[1:19:59] Voice 4: just have that much more so it just seems like yeah they do want that much more yes i know but

[1:20:06] Voice 4: i'm just saying that to have this permit thing for all new people you know so whoever's left now

[1:20:13] Voice 4: they're gonna have a hard thing whereas the 10 acres parcels a lot easier to try and figure out

[1:20:19] Voice 4: where you can build or when you can build than all of these other ones yeah it's exactly right

[1:20:26] Voice 4: it's it's modern practices that would never have permitted he's born today yeah

[1:20:34] Voice 1: because of that

[1:20:36] Voice 4: but yes the few lots that are undeveloped there yeah it's it's going to be tough it's going to

[1:20:43] Voice 4: be more challenging um but it can also be really unique and really exciting for people that are

[1:20:50] Voice 4: willing to go there this gentleman here hi kevin ruth i'm in proper code um this goes to the uh

[1:21:01] Voice 4: this is about the docks now i read somewhere that they're you're not allowing motorized vehicles

[1:21:08] Voice 4: vehicles to be driven on dogs, private dogs. Is that somewhere in Thailand?

[1:21:27] Voice 4: It's been brought to my attention by, well, Susan, your brother told me.

[1:21:32] Voice 4: Well, you told me about it.

[1:21:35] Voice 4: My brother reported it.

[1:21:38] Voice 4: Oh, yeah.

[1:21:39] Voice 4: I know, it's him.

[1:21:40] Voice 4: Well, I could say I've never heard it.

[1:21:44] Voice 4: because i you know i had some you know interesting situations where i had a friend who's a paraplegic

[1:21:50] Voice 4: come and visit us well the only way we can get them off our boat and up to our house was

[1:21:55] Voice 4: on our atv and we use it with a trailer to load heavy supplies which are you know i i can't carry

[1:22:04] Voice 4: a dump bag of cement from the dock up to my house there's just no air um i couldn't even push it on

[1:22:10] Voice 4: wheelbarrow i don't think it's just too steep this was something i was a little concerned about

[1:22:18] Voice 4: well yeah i mean i've got an atv it's small it's well i don't recall seeing that

[1:22:26] Voice 4: we're all islanders and we're

[1:22:28] Voice 4: all like yeah we all have these scenarios the one-off scenarios

[1:22:34] Voice 4: um yes well i don't think i'm the only one with this problem but i don't think it's a problem

[1:22:40] Voice 4: Yeah, like you've identified something you're concerned about, but I don't think it's in the bylaw.

[1:22:48] Voice 4: Oh, good.

[1:22:48] Voice 4: It could be one.

[1:22:50] Voice 4: You know, I mean, it's not that I'm driving up and down my dock every day.

[1:22:54] Voice 4: It's just that I bring heavy supplies.

[1:22:57] Voice 4: I need that.

[1:23:00] Voice 4: We're all in

[1:23:00] Voice 4: that situation where we have these scenarios.

[1:23:03] Voice 4: We're trying to live on an island.

[1:23:05] Voice 4: And we're doing the best we can.

[1:23:07] Voice 4: I don't have road access.

[1:23:08] Voice 4: the rules sometimes fit but there's there's times where we're all sort of doing the best we can to

[1:23:15] Voice 4: get through the day and that's okay anyway i as long as it isn't in there i relax i don't know

[1:23:23] Voice 4: if you're referring to the width no no no the width is fine a meter and a half works for that

[1:23:30] Voice 4: would be the only thing uh we're using i mean it's just that i i you know i had this friend over i

[1:23:37] Voice 4: wouldn't go out and buy a scooter you know i mean that would be impractical and we uh even

[1:23:42] Voice 4: electric wheelchair i wouldn't go there i'd get in and out of the boat absolutely yeah

[1:23:48] Voice 4: i kind of want to go back to the issue that that came up with the septic um because there are also

[1:23:56] Voice 4: um a lot of materials that have been used to go to theaters in the docks create islands things

[1:24:02] Voice 4: things like that.

[1:24:04] Voice 4: And I would think that Islands Trust would really

[1:24:06] Voice 4: want us to upgrade all of the bad environmental materials

[1:24:12] Voice 4: that we used in the past.

[1:24:13] Voice 4: And yet, it seems like the regulations

[1:24:17] Voice 4: are a disincentive, actually, for us to do that.

[1:24:22] Voice 4: And so what I'm wondering is, can the bylaws be modified

[1:24:25] Voice 4: to perhaps come up with a list of pre-approved materials

[1:24:28] Voice 4: materials or things like septic systems that are just uh they're pre-approved you can do that

[1:24:36] Voice 4: you can replace your creosote pilings on your dog without having to go through permits and

[1:24:42] Voice 4: pay a thousand dollars and so on and so forth

[1:24:46] Voice 1: well i think that's a good suggestion

[1:24:50] Voice 1: it could be an exception it could be an option that'd be terrific if

[1:25:01] Voice 4: you elaborate on that in

[1:25:02] Voice 4: in terms of you know you're contemplating an exemption you know you mentioned in terms removing

[1:25:08] Voice 4: old pilings uh and you mentioned something about septic fields or septics uh are there are there

[1:25:15] Voice 4: some other specific things that uh you would like to see the bylaw sensitive to like consent either

[1:25:24] Voice 4: providing an exemption or pre-approval that this activity doesn't need to be perfect i mean i think

[1:25:30] Voice 4: there's things to do in erosion control for example you know not not natural ways to help

[1:25:37] Voice 4: prevent erosion in the in the bylaws because you guys had a chart of soft to hard yeah right you

[1:25:45] Voice 4: know so maybe there's like the first five things on the soft list are okay do that you know don't

[1:25:51] Voice 4: bother us about that because you should just be able to go ahead and do that for example reduce

[1:25:56] Voice 4: barrier for translucent or transparent dogs as compared to opaque dogs that can show up as size

[1:26:04] Voice 4: or other kinds of encouragements well you don't need you don't need a permit like if you talk

[1:26:11] Voice 4: about dogs specifically and his model is pretty clear about this you don't need a permit if you're

[1:26:16] Voice 4: repairing a dog so if you're constantly changing the deck if you're replacing a dog everything has

[1:26:23] Voice 4: a lifetime at some point you're going to replace repairs become impractical and we want to encourage

[1:26:29] people to replace with more modern technologies that accomplish the goals you want to accomplish

[1:26:37] you want somebody to put in a transparent dock rather than than repair with opaque

[1:26:46] Voice 4: structure the guidelines so that that works they're encouraged to do that

[1:26:57] Voice 4: did you find it well it has to do with the trail leading to the door now you're saying that we're

[1:27:05] Voice 4: only allowed to build a trail that's only one meter wide well that's pretty impractical trying

[1:27:10] Voice 4: to bring dinghies from the shore up to your storage area for winter also trying to fix flies

[1:27:21] Voice 4: phone access only that's

[1:27:23] Voice 5: for an exemption so if you want an exemption if you do not want to apply

[1:27:27] Voice 5: apply for a dp then then yes the trail is less than one meter

[1:27:31] Voice 4: yes exemptions but then

[1:27:35] Voice 4: the construction of a trail in all of the following why

[1:27:39] Voice 5: so if you want to build a trail

[1:27:42] Voice 5: and you do not want to get a dp then you need to follow these guidelines if you want to build a

[1:27:46] Voice 5: trail and you are looking to have a wide trail and it's going to be used for a vehicle then you

[1:27:53] Voice 5: would need to apply for a dp if it's within that existing

[1:27:56] Voice 4: trail

[1:27:57] Voice 5: then

[1:27:58] Voice 4: it's just pretty good so then

[1:28:01] Voice 4: that's okay because it says here uh non-vehicle use on that

[1:28:07] Voice 5: just be for creation of a new trail

[1:28:09] Voice 5: if you do not want to get it yeah your

[1:28:12] Voice 4: trail is safe i mean we should it's implicit i mean

[1:28:18] Voice 4: these are forward looking

[1:28:18] Voice 5: yes okay yeah and you can always contact staff with very specific

[1:28:24] Voice 5: examples of things on your property and we can work with that because i know there's a lot of

[1:28:29] Voice 5: you yeah

[1:28:30] Voice 4: i'd like to follow up with something that susan mentioned in passing related it's

[1:28:37] referred to marla split the green shores um initiative or the approach to preserving

[1:28:44] shoreline using alpha green

[1:28:46] Voice 4: choice techniques um point of clarification here uh if you've got

[1:28:52] property

[1:28:52] Voice 4: owner wants to do that is that an activity that requires permanent or is that

[1:28:59] Voice 4: something that is uh that people are just free to do with that no it

[1:29:05] Voice 4: would like it would require

[1:29:06] Voice 4: it would

[1:29:07] Voice 2: be disturbing that's a good advice a technique too

[1:29:11] Voice 2: anything

[1:29:12] Voice 4: around but for sure just more likely to come with archaeological um issues so that's why

[1:29:21] Voice 4: it's always part of the reason why we're interested always at least having awareness

[1:29:28] Voice 4: so that's how the process allows for awareness for what's happening for sure so that the right

[1:29:35] Voice 4: areas can be considered because of that connected to our ecological possible currency so that's

[1:29:44] Voice 4: another reason why we'd be looking at having that connectivity with the committee around

[1:29:52] Voice 4: route for any foreshore changes.

[1:29:58] Voice 1: Any other questions?

[1:30:00] Voice 1: this

[1:30:00] Voice 3: is a reaction and feedback i think this thing draws a lot of emotion because there's

[1:30:09] Voice 3: a general feeling that it's coming from somewhere else and has not been customized to each island

[1:30:15] Voice 3: which is unique because there's a whole lot of lots that require water access to use them

[1:30:23] Voice 3: and live on them and there's not that many roads and so there's a feeling that this stuff is coming

[1:30:30] Voice 3: coming from provincial guidelines, municipal guidelines, federal guidelines that don't

[1:30:37] Voice 3: even know where Keats Island is, let alone how we live on the island.

[1:30:42] Voice 3: So at some future meeting, I'd really appreciate some feedback as to what's happened in these

[1:30:49] Voice 3: other communities where these guidelines are already in place.

[1:30:53] Voice 3: And is it working or is it not working or is it creating problems with permitting and

[1:31:00] Voice 3: and people ignoring the regulations,

[1:31:02] Voice 3: because these regulations are only gonna work

[1:31:04] Voice 3: if they're permitted or if the neighbor complains.

[1:31:09] Voice 3: And you don't have the enforcement arm

[1:31:11] Voice 3: to be able to enforce compliance

[1:31:14] Voice 3: if people don't want to agree with them.

[1:31:17] Voice 3: So I'd like to see some feedback

[1:31:20] Voice 3: as to what's happening in these other places

[1:31:22] Voice 3: where these best practices are being imposed,

[1:31:26] Voice 3: because I think we're all a bit afraid

[1:31:28] Voice 3: as to what these best practices are going to mean to us

[1:31:32] Voice 3: and how we live on peace.

[1:31:34] Voice 3: So if you can give us some of that feedback and information,

[1:31:38] Voice 3: it

[1:31:38] Voice 4: would be appreciated.

[1:31:42] Voice 4: Thanks, Mr. Chief, from Bumper Cove.

[1:31:45] Voice 4: I just want to build on what other people have said.

[1:31:48] Voice 4: And if the Islands Trust and the planners can incentivize better behavior,

[1:31:55] Voice 4: and whether that's cost breaks on environmentally friendly thing,

[1:31:59] Voice 4: an open door for engagement with planners and maybe other technical staff and say you know i

[1:32:05] Voice 4: want to do the right thing but i'm poor destitute and all those other things so what can i do you

[1:32:11] Voice 4: know on the on the cheap and the legal that you think is effective because you've got lots of

[1:32:16] Voice 4: experience and if um you can get incentivized with a lesser permit fee or an exemption

[1:32:26] Voice 4: and maybe this list of things that we've talked about could be an ongoing list of

[1:32:34] Voice 4: if you do this plant these trees and what have you you're good we don't need to hear from you

[1:32:40] Voice 4: because i think that gets away from the stigma of bloody hell a development permit then a variation

[1:32:46] Voice 4: permit then all the consultants consultants fees then you just say i will do this quietly on a

[1:32:55] Voice 4: sunday and that's not the right thing to do thank

[1:32:59] Voice 2: you so we do have an open door i think the staff

[1:33:03] Voice 2: are available to consult andy

[1:33:06] Voice 4: i i

[1:33:07] Voice 2: know that i i

[1:33:07] Voice 4: used to work for government so i know the open

[1:33:10] Voice 4: door and i know it's a challenge to find the time to be open and if there was a a team that had a

[1:33:18] Voice 4: little broader expertise like some engineering kind of stuff and maybe some fisheries kind of

[1:33:24] Voice 4: stuff and maybe some receptive kind of stuff um i mean you can't you can't staff up the island

[1:33:31] Voice 4: trust with a whole bunch of specialists but to have that availability

[1:33:35] Voice 1: and say hey you know i've

[1:33:37] Voice 4: worked with these this consultant in your area it's got bitten or something it's an assumption

[1:33:42] Voice 4: um you know you should

[1:33:44] Voice 1: talk to him thank

[1:33:48] Voice 1: you okay are we done today i don't think so

[1:34:01] Voice 4: what do you want to talk about i think we should follow up on what chris talked about here which is

[1:34:08] Voice 4: you know that there's a tenor of the many of the comments have come out today

[1:34:13] Voice 4: are that uh and if i i'm phrasing it wrong i apologize in advance which is

[1:34:20] Voice 4: there's a general concern that the way the bylaw is written they feel blunt and if it

[1:34:28] Voice 4: especially since we've been having a lot of discussion around the idea of exemptions

[1:34:32] Voice 4: people talk about pre-approvals i'm not sure about people's being peaceful but

[1:34:38] Voice 4: the idea of there being exemptions being specified which you don't need to apply

[1:34:42] Voice 4: to get a permit if you're going to do x y and z within certain parameters prominent

[1:34:49] Voice 4: in my mind which have been falling over discussions going on it's the point that

[1:34:53] Voice 4: chris brought up before or coastal health i appreciate the fact that having a planning

[1:35:00] Voice 4: staff review an application to upgrade the septic system is going to have another level of scrutiny

[1:35:07] Voice 4: it's going to give our local trustee area added security that is being done right

[1:35:15] Voice 4: but i think it's incumbent on us to see what the actual goals of health requirements are

[1:35:20] and to ask yourselves a serious question is whether or not the permanent really adds that

[1:35:24] much value like at our end to what the culture health people are already doing because

[1:35:31] you know to come up with an example yes you're going to

[1:35:36] upgrade the septic system hypothetically in some case you're

[1:35:40] Voice 4: going to have to disturb a

[1:35:41] Voice 4: bunch of shrubbery you know some valued piece of greenery may go but if it's within

[1:35:51] Voice 4: setbacks and even if it's partially within the dpa you're still improving the septic system and if

[1:35:59] coastal health is saying that's an upgrade well that has an obvious environmental improvement

[1:36:05] value

[1:36:06] Voice 4: so it may be that and we have to think it through but it may be that the trade-off

[1:36:11] Voice 4: the value of a trade-off has already worked into it and therefore maybe we should consider an

[1:36:16] Voice 4: exemption but for the example the nutrition brought up which is it's already been got

[1:36:23] Voice 4: approval by the health authorities maybe that's enough i don't i'm not promising anything i don't

[1:36:29] Voice 4: know if that's the answer but you know what i'm hearing is that type of thinking other people

[1:36:37] Voice 4: want that applied to other aspects of what would happen with the dpa have i got that right yes

[1:36:42] Voice 4: because i think i mean talking about environmental perspective what could possibly be worse than

[1:36:47] Voice 4: creating a pilot right i mean it seems like anything bigger than that yeah i think we've

[1:36:55] Voice 4: got that on the list yeah there's like a series of things right other aspects to an application

[1:37:04] Voice 4: it's not just about an environment there's other aspects to this so how would that i mean i'm not

[1:37:10] Voice 4: say no i'm just saying look let's let's look at it it's more you know what are the implications

[1:37:16] Voice 4: yeah crystal products accepting systems yeah that's quite two different of course but you've

[1:37:23] Voice 4: already made exceptions say if it's a repair or maintenance then you're accepted right well you

[1:37:30] Voice 6: can you can consider other actions if you're replacing an old pilot an old creosote pilot

[1:37:36] Voice 6: with a new hyperspace piling then that's approved right and so so you can think about equivalences

[1:37:44] that cover other domains improving the septic improving the docks better protection of the

[1:37:52] foreshore etc where you want to encourage and i will use a phrase

[1:37:57] Voice 6: that i despise best practices

[1:38:03] Voice 4: don't get me started don't get me started we used to build supercomputers that i know about

[1:38:09] Voice 4: best practices there's no way um so

[1:38:12] Voice 6: but are there some practices that you want to encourage

[1:38:16] Voice 6: structure the guidelines and structure the rules so that it's easier to do those than it is to go

[1:38:22] Voice 6: do the backward looking practices that you have inherited which were at the time best practices

[1:38:29] Voice 6: right so why

[1:38:30] Voice 4: why are the better alternatives right into the bylaws people see if i take this path

[1:38:35] Voice 4: it's easier for me to do the right thing yes yes yeah and kind of tying that in there's an

[1:38:41] Voice 4: educational

[1:38:42] Voice 6: thrust that you can

[1:38:43] Voice 6: get with this right you've been hit you can help us understand

[1:38:46] Voice 6: why are certain ways to build docks better today than they were 100 years ago and why is it better

[1:38:55] well i think we all understand why septics are better today but okay you know i mean educate

[1:39:00] people and if you can make that part of the charter of of the staff they won't be answering

[1:39:07] quite as many questions and they'll have time to do the education

[1:39:10] Voice 6: and the people that do come to

[1:39:12] Voice 6: them will be a lot happier and have better questions in the first place right so so there's

[1:39:19] Voice 6: a great education opportunity here as well so

[1:39:22] Voice 4: if we did workshops things like that is that

[1:39:25] Voice 4: something that's like we did have a resource workshop we had a few people attend

[1:39:32] Voice 4: generally has a trust level if you you're actually intending on doing something that's when

[1:39:37] Voice 4: you tend to go to these workshops but if you can see areas where you do want education something

[1:39:44] Voice 4: that's that is more positive is having workshops having interactive engagement that isn't just

[1:39:52] Voice 4: about regulation and what you can not do well that's actually not what i'm hearing i'm not

[1:39:58] Voice 4: hearing a desire just for education i'm hearing desire for regulation that's just easier for people

[1:40:03] Voice 4: to manage less renting that that if if an alternative is desirable and can be clearly

[1:40:14] Voice 4: articulated why do you have to you know what i'm hearing the general big question is like why do

[1:40:19] Voice 4: you have to regulate and require permitting all the rest of it if there if you can be specific

[1:40:25] Voice 4: enough about designating a desirable activity like a desirable improvement i mean the green

[1:40:32] Voice 4: source thing comes to mind which is somebody's interested in proving and protecting against

[1:40:39] Voice 4: shoreline erosion there's an appropriate way of doing it but you still have to get a permit if

[1:40:44] Voice 4: you do if you undertake to do it with appropriate wet you know i can see that there are some

[1:40:49] Voice 4: boundaries but there may be some specific things we can identify if you do x not some general

[1:40:57] Voice 4: development but if you do this activity for example replacing island you know uh we're not

[1:41:04] Voice 4: going to treat that as a replacement we're going to treat that as maintenance which by the way i

[1:41:09] Voice 4: think to address that point there is a certain inevitable ambiguity between replace and repair

[1:41:17] Voice 4: if some storm comes through it completely blows through a dock and you got to start the whole

[1:41:23] thing from scratch yeah that's a replacement i'm not sure replacing one creosote piling counts as

[1:41:31] replacement

[1:41:32] Voice 4: for maintenance uh i think it's a pretty fair guess

[1:41:38] Voice 4: you're not likely to get hassled for doing something that looks like maintenance

[1:41:43] Voice 4: even though you're replacing a parking well you know the thing about bylaws

[1:41:47] Voice 2: is somebody has to complain about it yeah and then quite honestly yeah they're doing that now

[1:41:57] Voice 2: Well, you've got to put that free-of-sale filing back.

[1:42:02] Voice 2: That's just not going to happen.

[1:42:04] Voice 2: Or if you want to replace with better flotation,

[1:42:07] Voice 5: you're allowed to do that.

[1:42:09] Voice 5: You're allowed to replace your decking material with

[1:42:11] Voice 6: more transparent.

[1:42:12] Voice 5: Please

[1:42:13] Voice 6: replace your starter.

[1:42:14] Voice 6: And I think it would help to educate us about what that distinction is,

[1:42:18] Voice 6: because to me, replacing a flotation is a wholesale change.

[1:42:22] Voice 6: that would not occur to me that that was maintenance, right?

[1:42:26] Voice 6: Fixing an ailing float?

[1:42:29] Voice 6: Yeah, sure, maintenance.

[1:42:30] Voice 6: But wholesale replacing all of the floats with better technology?

[1:42:35] Voice 6: I'm not sure that sounds like maintenance,

[1:42:37] Voice 6: especially if it doesn't come before the end of the lifetime of the other material.

[1:42:42] Voice 6: So help us understand what those limits are.

[1:42:45] Voice 6: Make it more clear.

[1:42:48] Voice 4: Well, what you're asking for is that, really, if you want to boil it down,

[1:42:52] Voice 4: you're asking for us to provide binding guidance when i say binding finding on us which is

[1:42:58] Voice 4: not

[1:43:00] Voice 1: best

[1:43:01] Voice 4: practices nothing generic for being specific like uh in order to provide the

[1:43:07] Voice 4: guidance that you're asking for uh something along the lines of shopping activities which is

[1:43:15] we're telling you these activities will not be interpreted as requiring permanent or

[1:43:22] these

[1:43:23] Voice 4: activities on your dog for example will not be interpreted as a replacement it will be

[1:43:27] Voice 4: triggered to be those repair of our maintenance and you get specific about it that way you can

[1:43:32] Voice 4: just see that guidance and because we've told you that you don't need to have a permit that

[1:43:36] Voice 4: you know you can do that now that creates that's hard for us as regulators to do because it's like

[1:43:45] Voice 4: we're going to commit ourselves to a position without actually going all the way can we do

[1:43:50] that i don't know uh but it's worth exploring uh to see how far

[1:43:56] Voice 4: we can go with it and the

[1:43:57] Voice 4: alternative is to push all the uncertainty on us so we're not as well right with the technology

[1:44:02] Voice 5: you can always call staff like you know and you can say this is what i'm planning to do do i need

[1:44:08] Voice 4: yeah we have like open we get that all the time i think people are afraid to do that because they

[1:44:17] Voice 4: They fear the

[1:44:18] Voice 1: bylaws officer

[1:44:19] Voice 4: is going to show up on their front door.

[1:44:22] Voice 4: You don't

[1:44:23] Voice 4: have any officers.

[1:44:26] Voice 4: Well, actually, I've seen them before.

[1:44:28] Voice 4: They've shown up at their places before.

[1:44:32] Voice 4: Not because you were making plans.

[1:44:34] Voice 4: No, I know.

[1:44:35] Voice 4: They just happened to show up at 50 places.

[1:44:38] Voice 4: Do we have any more questions?

[1:44:40] Voice 4: Well, I know we all

[1:44:43] Voice 4: want transparent decking on our floats.

[1:44:46] Voice 4: But until they can invent a transparent float underneath your decking, what's it going to do?

[1:44:56] Voice 4: I mean, you've got black plastic floats holding up your dock.

[1:45:01] Voice 4: But if you have transparent decking, you know, they do make it.

[1:45:05] Voice 4: What's the percentage that you want to see now?

[1:45:12] Voice 4: There are, there are recommended technology and then, of course, you know, you get a lot of growth. So whatever they are, if they are there, folks are going to be walking inside eventually because it pluses and particles.

[1:45:25] Voice 4: It seems like everyone has their own unique scenario.

[1:45:29] Voice 4: We can't, we can't, like, every single scenario.

[1:45:33] Voice 4: we're talking to you guys in the gaps so yeah we're trying to be reasonable here and give you

[1:45:41] Voice 4: the option to work within that if we try and put every single exemption in there there's always

[1:45:47] Voice 4: going to be one we're going to ask and five years from now there'll be completely different

[1:45:52] Voice 4: technologies so we're trying to again it's that sort of middle ground yeah

[1:45:57] Voice 6: do you want the average

[1:45:58] Voice 6: citizen interpreting those technological

[1:46:00] Voice 6: changes and applying them, or do you

[1:46:03] Voice 6: want trained individuals making

[1:46:05] Voice 6: recommendations

[1:46:05] Voice 4: about

[1:46:06] Voice 4: technology updates?

[1:46:08] Voice 4: Correct?

[1:46:10] Let's go to this question right here,

[1:46:12] Voice 4: because I know it's not

[1:46:13] Voice 4: going to use that word.

[1:46:14] Voice 4: It's a little bit different.

[1:46:16] Voice 4: Going back to your work,

[1:46:17] Voice 4: I think we've done some sort of best

[1:46:20] Voice 4: practices, not very much

[1:46:22] Voice 4: proven, whether it's a

[1:46:24] Voice 4: fighting force, or

[1:46:25] Voice 4: a real thing.

[1:46:30] Voice 4: here all the time. Is there like pumps that don't even work, that have been thrown out, or do you know, big problems?

[1:46:38] Voice 4: Is there, is there a place on the Island Stress website that has, but they don't have it?

[1:46:48] Voice 4: What is, what sort of pumps work and, you know, if there's recommendations or anything like that?

[1:46:54] Voice 4: Or

[1:46:54] Voice 1: is there a water chocolate fire department?

[1:46:56] Voice 1: Well, I realize

[1:46:57] Voice 4: this is not an answer, but talk to your local fire department.

[1:47:02] Voice 2: I would be happy to offer your advice on that as the deputy chief

[1:47:09] Voice 4: on my part.

[1:47:10] Voice 4: That's not how that's

[1:47:12] Voice 2: going to be here.

[1:47:14] Voice 4: If we can get back to the purpose of this meeting, which is, I mean,

[1:47:19] Voice 4: Kurt's raised an important issue, which is fire management,

[1:47:21] Voice 4: but we're really trying to focus here on the fire laws here.

[1:47:25] Voice 4: And I've actually got a question from Marlins, which is, you know,

[1:47:30] Voice 4: protecting the eelgrass

[1:47:31] Voice 4: and the port shore environment

[1:47:34] Voice 4: that's one of the reasons

[1:47:35] Voice 4: why we would like to see

[1:47:37] Voice 4: more transparent surfaces on floats

[1:47:42] Voice 4: and a constituent raised

[1:47:45] Voice 4: this question

[1:47:45] Voice 4: why do we do both?

[1:47:49] Voice 4: we have a requirement for transparency

[1:47:50] Voice 4: but also we're narrowing the size

[1:47:52] Voice 4: or making floats smaller

[1:47:56] Voice 4: why do we have to do both?

[1:47:58] Voice 4: if you have

[1:47:59] Voice 4: a properly transparent

[1:48:01] Voice 4: transparent float. Why should it be subject to these increased restrictions on suns?

[1:48:07] Voice 4: I mean, can there be an alternative if you have a smaller float?

[1:48:12] Voice 4: Or a bigger float that's transparent? Or is that a kind of dumb question?

[1:48:16] Voice 4: I am not an aquatic scientist, so I don't know exactly.

[1:48:22] Voice 4: You're looking for the smallest footprint possible.

[1:48:26] Voice 4: And if it's small and is transparent, that's the smallest footprint.

[1:48:31] Voice 4: but not everybody's going to be able to have those transparent colors.

[1:48:35] Voice 4: Um so you're working to the best point you can get.

[1:48:41] Voice 4: Where it's difficult to get to your property except for the float, then

[1:48:48] Voice 3: the initial proposal

[1:48:51] Voice 3: was to reduce the maximum float size by 60 percent. So it changed. But you changed it when there's a

[1:48:58] Voice 3: a whole lot of feedback yeah i don't think you've really satisfied everybody but it seems like

[1:49:03] Voice 3: you're you're double dipping on this one with both size and materials and i think that might

[1:49:10] Voice 3: be worth reconsidering it doesn't have to be entirely

[1:49:13] Voice 5: transparent

[1:49:17] Voice 4: but also eelgrass grows out to certain depth and in most cases dogs aren't over the eelgrass

[1:49:25] Voice 4: ramps and piers are but realistically most docks are beyond so a transparent dock is going to

[1:49:34] Voice 4: allow what it's going to be redundant well there's forage fish habitats and they actually

[1:49:42] Voice 4: blossom under docks that are non-transparent yes

[1:49:46] Voice 3: my grandkids are like more docks or fish

[1:49:48] Voice 3: under the docks than they do anywhere else

[1:49:50] Voice 4: absolutely i i mentioned this last time i

[1:49:54] Voice 4: one of our meetings, I'm a scuba diver.

[1:49:56] Voice 4: I dive in our bay

[1:49:57] Voice 4: and literally it's a desert

[1:50:00] Voice 4: beyond the eelgrass.

[1:50:02] Voice 4: But under our docks

[1:50:04] Voice 4: there's a abundancy

[1:50:06] Voice 4: of life. That's what they do.

[1:50:10] Voice 4: And it's even proven in the

[1:50:12] Voice 4: oceans with

[1:50:13] Voice 4: the plastics floating around

[1:50:16] Voice 4: that is creating these

[1:50:18] Voice 4: micro

[1:50:19] Voice 4: habitats

[1:50:23] Voice 4: for

[1:50:24] Voice 4: or fish now it's unfortunate because most of us just did but it's it's amazing um what kind of

[1:50:35] Voice 4: life uh something that protects uh on the surface protects so i think you've got your question yeah

[1:50:42] Voice 2: okay very

[1:50:44] Voice 4: good and i appreciate your comment harry yeah this is not we've

[1:50:49] Voice 2: gone way beyond

[1:50:50] Voice 2: and

[1:50:51] Voice 4: by my eyes just two brief things

[1:50:56] Voice 4: first of all my experience is nobody likes regulations or red tape until somebody else

[1:51:02] Voice 4: on the island does something they don't like exactly and then they go why aren't you doing

[1:51:05] Voice 4: something like that and um so i just want you to keep that in mind and that happens

[1:51:11] Voice 4: happens a lot you know probably on all her fat a lot of the time so this is the opportunity

[1:51:16] Voice 4: to the community to have it say and that's what the list of exemptions is for it may be a bad

[1:51:21] Voice 4: nomenclature i mean it may not come across but that's exactly what kentucky uh the second thing

[1:51:28] Voice 4: is i do want to remind you probably i'm trying to do the math in my head as the properties on

[1:51:35] Voice 4: my peaks are not waterfront um there are tons of people who have a very distinct vested interest

[1:51:43] Voice 4: and what happens in the waterfront they don't live there um and so we need to keep in mind what uh

[1:51:48] Voice 4: their view is as well as the the waterfront owners who have have taken in most cases good care of

[1:51:56] Voice 4: their have been good stewards but there are probably about half the island and again i

[1:52:04] Voice 4: have to be mad i'm one i'm not one so there you go great thanks anything else

[1:52:13] Voice 4: today mine that will

[1:52:16] Voice 4: be public hearing yeah what we're going to do is take this information and um have a conversation

[1:52:28] Voice 4: with staff figure out what it looks like next thank you thank you thank you all for being here

[1:52:33] Voice 4: thank you everybody there are an estimate of this

[1:52:36] Voice 4: like a very public very we have

[1:52:39] Voice 1: to figure that out

[1:52:41] Voice 4: we have to discuss a bunch of cells

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 1 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
July 21, 2023 
 
Gambier Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Special Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
July 21, 2023 
Gibsons Public Market 
473 Gower Point Road 
Gibsons, BC 
 
Members Present: Peter Luckham, Chair 
 Kate-Louise Stamford, Local Trustee 
 Joe Bernardo, Local Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Marlis McCargar, Island Planner 
 Diane Corbett, Recorder 
  
Others Present: There were approximately eighteen (18) members of the public in 
attendance. 
 
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 Luckham called the meeting to order at 1:00 pm. He acknowledged that the meeting was 
being held on the Squamish territory of the Coast Salish First Nations. He introduced trustees 
and staff in attendance, and described the format for the community information meeting. 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
By general consent the agenda was approved as presented. 
3. BUSINESS ITEMS 
3.1 Keats Island Shoreline Protection Project - Proposed Bylaw Nos. 153 (OCP) and 154 
(LUB) - Staff Presentation 
Island Planner McCargar provided an overview of the Keats Island Shoreline Protection 
Project that included: project background and summary of work to date; proposed 
Amendment Bylaws No. 153 (to amend Keats Island Official Community Plan) and No. 
154 (to amend the Keats Island Land Use Bylaw); current level of protection for Keats 
shoreline; proposed Shoreline Development Permit Area (DP-3) for the purposes of 
protecting the natural environment, its ecosystems and biological diversity, and 
protecting development from hazardous conditions; the DPA application process and 
related scenarios; the legislative process to amend the bylaws; and next steps for the 
Local Trust Committee to consider. Information on this project has been posted to the 
Islands Trust website. 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 2 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
July 21, 2023 
There have been no amendments to the proposed bylaws since the last community 
information meeting. 
3.2 Question and Answer Period 
Chair Luckham thanked the Islands Planner for the presentation and invited questions 
about what was proposed.  
 
Questions that were raised included: 
 Clarify how far apart the docks have to be within the extension of the lot lines. Is 
there a minimum or can the float go right to the property line?  
o Currently private floats and docks shall be located within the seaward boundary 
of the upland property three metres from the projection of those lot lines, the 
proposed changes is five metres. 
o This setback regulation does not apply to a shared dock boundary between 
residential lots. 
 Will the projection of the lot line be at the same angle? 
o Yes. Where the head of the dock lands on the shore will be changed from three 
metres to five metres.  
 This isn’t workable in some neighbourhoods where the shorelines are not straight 
and there are rocky shorelines; the positioning of the float is dictated by the 
shoreline and geography.  
o For unique sites, there is an option to apply for a development variance permit. 
 Amendment of this bylaw needs to take into consideration what currently exists and 
what needs to be accomplished, and to avoid the requirement for a variance 
application in order to do something that’s practical and necessary.  
o Existing buildings would be considered legal non-conforming.  
 On page 4 of the staff report, it says the legal non-conforming use may be continued 
unless the use is discontinued for six months. Many people lock up their properties 
in October and come back in May. How will this work? 
o The use of land, a building or other structure, for seasonal uses, is not 
discontinued as a result of normal seasonal practices (Section 528(3) of the 
Local Government Act). 
 Suggestion to make a small amendment to the introductory section of the OCP 
indicating that there is a lot of seasonal use as a normal practice. 
 Some lots are very small; many dwellings are in the setback area, and many were 
built a long time ago. If people want to add on, or redo the foundation, or if the 
house burns down, do they have to apply for a development permit as well as 
building permits?  
o Yes. 
 How does it work if it is deemed there is no place for the structure to be built within 
the setbacks from the road and the sea? 
o In that case, the property owner would apply for a development variance 
permit. 
 There are a lot of properties that do not have septic systems. They have been 
utilizing outhouses or flushing grey water into the ocean. Now with new technology 
it is possible for these properties to build septic systems. Do they have to go 
through Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) for a permit, and a development variance 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 3 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
July 21, 2023 
permit? Right now if you want to upgrade your septic, you just have to apply to 
VCH.  
o If they are constructing the system within fifteen metres from the natural 
boundary of the sea, they could apply for a development permit (DP). The VCH 
approval would be part of the documentation that gets submitted as part of a 
DP application. 
 Concern about extra fees and the requirement of an environmental assessment. 
o Applicants will need to ensure they meet the guidelines of the development 
permit. 
 Especially when it comes to septic, Islands Trust should be doing everything it can to 
support these properties to get septic systems. There should be an exception to 
waive the fees.  
o Having a reduced fee or waiving the fee for septic system replacement or 
upgrades is something the LTC could look into.  
 Concern that permit is only valid for two years and that island builds take a long 
time. 
o The permit is valid as long as the construction is started within two years; it 
doesn’t have to be completed within that period. 
 Where are you at with First Nations consultation on this?  
o There has not been a resolution; Squamish Nation is concerned with leaving the 
building setbacks regulations at 7.5 metre.  
o Staff has worked to consult. The Squamish Nation is very busy and has to 
prioritize the workload of their staff and decision-making process.  
 Why is it proposed that the two large undeveloped lots in the centre of the island 
have a setback of 15 metres? Has any thought been given to increasing the setback 
on those parcels just where it is fragile, and leaving the 7.5 metres where there is 
cliff and nothing to erode?  
o This has not been considered.7.5m is not considered optimum; many other 
jurisdictions are looking at 30 metres as a recommended standard.  
 Rethink using the term “water access only.” 
o There are a number of lots on Keats that don’t have road access; that is the 
differentiation. 
 Could the bylaws include a list of materials or septic systems that are pre-approved 
without having to go through the permitting process to encourage applicants to use 
appropriate materials?  
o The LTC can consider additional exemptions. 
 If a property owner wants to do Green Shores initiatives to preserve the shoreline, 
does that require permitting? 
o Yes.  
 Keats is unique because many lots can only be accessed by the water. Could we see 
examples of what has happened in other communities where these guidelines are 
already in place to see if they are working or not?  
 Islands Trust should incentivize environmentally friendly behaviour with cost breaks 
or permit exemptions.  
 Structure the guidelines and the rules to encourage environmentally friendly 
practices. Promote educational campaigns.  
 What is the distinction between “fixing” and “replacing”? Needs to be clearer. 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 4 
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes 
July 21, 2023 
 Concerns raised around forest fires. 
o Contact the appropriate local fire department. 
 Protecting eelgrass in foreshore environment is one reason to see more transparent 
surfaces on floats. If a float is properly transparent it should not be subject to size 
restrictions. 
Chair Luckham noted the Local Trust Committee would take the conversation today and 
have a conversation with staff. 
The Chair thanked everyone for coming to the meeting. 
4. ADJOURNMENT 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 2:53 pm. 
 
 
_________________________ 
Peter Luckham, Chair 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Diane Corbett, Recorder