Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee community information meeting, November 16, 2023

[0:00:06] Voice 3: Okay, good morning, everyone, and welcome to this regular business meeting of the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee for November 16th, 2023.

[0:00:21] Voice 3: I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge that the Islands Trust Area is situated within the territory of Coast Salish peoples and sits at the center of many gathering places and villages of these strong and vibrant nations.

[0:00:33] Voice 3: of this respect for this place inspires us to create richness celebrate the richness of the

[0:00:40] Voice 3: Coast Salish history knowledge and culture and informs the work that we do we acknowledge with

[0:00:45] Voice 3: respect that the Coast Salish speaking peoples on whose traditional territories the island's

[0:00:49] Voice 3: trust is situated we acknowledge this historical relationship to the land culture and spirit of

[0:00:55] Voice 3: this place that continues to this day the nations within the Salish Sea have gathered and celebrated

[0:01:01] Voice 3: upon this land their traditional territory since time immemorial they have a rich culture history

[0:01:07] Voice 3: and knowledge that is connected to the islands and waters of this place the islands trust

[0:01:11] Voice 3: acknowledges the coast salish nations and welcomes you to gather and celebrate in the spirit of

[0:01:16] Voice 3: coming together to learn and share um so my name is tim peterson i'm elected on the skeedy island

[0:01:26] Voice 3: i'm the chair of the salt spring island local trust committee with me today are local trustees

[0:01:32] Voice 3: Jamie Harris and Laura Patrick and we also have um regional director Gary Holman with us

[0:01:40] Voice 3: and I'm you don't

[0:01:42] Voice 11: have a name tag and I don't know your name

[0:01:43] Voice 3: I'm sorry Earl Rook LCC chair

[0:01:45] Voice 3: Earl Rook uh chair of the LCC we also have uh uh Rob Pingel Sarah Sugar and uh Chris Hutton

[0:01:54] Voice 3: our staff ably supporting us today so we have an agenda before us and are there any additions to

[0:02:03] Voice 3: today's agenda i would like to add discussion

[0:02:10] Voice 3: okay so thank you i'll put that under 15.3 for new business bill 44 and trustee patrick

[0:02:21] Voice 3: uh no that's um you also wanted to do bill 44. okay so can i take it by general consent then

[0:02:29] Voice 3: we will approve the agenda as amended okay so first our next item then is a town hall and

[0:02:40] Voice 3: questions uh section so members of the public uh can address the local trust committee

[0:02:49] Voice 3: questions or comments and please uh stick to the business of the local trust committee

[0:02:56] Voice 3: and uh preferably what's on our agenda today and uh remember to please use respectful language

[0:03:03] Voice 3: to speak to the issues and non-individuals and with that i'll look for a show of hands

[0:03:09] Voice 3: to see if there are folks in the room who would like to speak to us today yes

[0:03:16] Voice 9: good morning my name is Yvonne Saunders i've been part of the TAF course

[0:03:20] Voice 9: um we were appointed about two and a half years ago by the islands trust we're working as you

[0:03:26] Voice 9: know very closely with you which is wonderful as it's what we need to pull together we all feel

[0:03:31] Voice 9: really frustrated that nothing really concrete has been done so far to implement any of the

[0:03:38] Voice 9: suggestions that we've made and so i'm here i guess as an individual we're also part of a group

[0:03:45] Voice 9: that was um originally put together and just to say that could we please please have some decisions

[0:03:52] Voice 9: because we do need something on the island to make more housing.

[0:03:56] Voice 9: You know, we have a wonderful new wing being put on the hospital,

[0:03:59] Voice 9: which is wonderful, but if we don't have nurses and staff to run it,

[0:04:03] Voice 9: then the whole thing becomes a ball pit.

[0:04:05] Voice 9: We also have people, even within our group, that are lost employees

[0:04:10] Voice 9: because there's nowhere for them to live.

[0:04:12] Voice 9: So I don't have to tell you this is new news because you already know this,

[0:04:16] Voice 9: but could you please give the next item that will help the situation on the island?

[0:04:20] Voice 9: and thank you very much thank

[0:04:24] Voice 3: you for that and is there anyone else today who'd like to speak

[0:04:31] Voice 3: okay quiet group today all right then uh in that case we'll move on to the trustee reports trustees

[0:04:39] Voice 3: who'd like to go first i have nothing to report anything nothing to report dr patrick

[0:04:44] Voice 8: um

[0:04:46] Voice 8: i wasn't saying thank you yvonne for speaking today just

[0:04:54] Voice 3: to know if i i feel like chief

[0:04:58] Voice 3: frustration officer on this island i've been working on housing started when i was a commissioner

[0:05:03] Voice 3: for the former economic sustainability commission and and the work that i headed up the housing

[0:05:08] Voice 3: profile i've worked there and the reports that we all had worked on there that group and um

[0:05:14] Voice 3: um and then we're moving to a trustee here we tried bringing up early in my term bringing an

[0:05:22] Voice 3: OCP review and I got shot down. Then we got the housing working group which did great work. We

[0:05:31] Voice 3: had the housing task force that did great work. Here we are still. It's extremely frustrating.

[0:05:38] Voice 3: Bylaw 530 was born out of direction to expand the early request on the housing working group to

[0:05:44] Voice 3: allow secondary suites across the island and to include suites and accessory buildings like the

[0:05:50] Voice 3: the carriage house we asked that it be faced and limited numbers following a public hearing again

[0:05:57] Voice 3: we asked for a

[0:05:58] Voice 3: method to limit the numbers and here we are a year after that meeting and we're

[0:06:05] Voice 3: still the only method that's come forward for limiting numbers has been map based

[0:06:12] Voice 3: um you know we we do hear all the reasons why someone doesn't want to be a landlord

[0:06:16] Voice 3: But thankfully, many islanders do and are willing to be landlords.

[0:06:23] Voice 3: Many have wonderful experiences sharing their property.

[0:06:26] Voice 3: And I think more will.

[0:06:29] Voice 3: How can we cast a wide net but limit the numbers?

[0:06:33] Voice 3: I'll discuss that later when we talk about it on the agenda.

[0:06:37] Voice 3: I can report that as a regional planning committee, which is a standard committee of Trust Council, that I'm the chair of, yesterday endorsed a housing toolkit and housing strategy for Trust Council.

[0:06:51] Voice 3: One of the tools that will be implemented through that toolkit is some new mapping techniques that will give us the tools we need to have those conversations about where it makes sense to put density on our islands.

[0:07:04] Voice 3: And I'm looking forward to the development of that tool and as we learn how to use it and have those conversations here on Salt Spring.

[0:07:13] Voice 3: I'm proud to be working with the Rural Island Economic Partnership, their housing group, who's working hard to develop an ask of the province to support rural island housing programs.

[0:07:28] Voice 3: There's not an island, big or small, that's not experiencing the housing issues.

[0:07:32] Voice 3: And it's great in the Rural Island Economic Partnership is also working with islands outside the Islands Trust.

[0:07:41] Voice 3: And there are some that are really taking some actions.

[0:07:46] Voice 3: I've been following the progress of Bill 44 and doing everything I can to raise awareness to the impacts of Salt Spring being left out again.

[0:07:57] Voice 3: Again, the Annals Trust was exempted specifically from what's called Section 481.3 of this draft bill, which is the density piece.

[0:08:09] Voice 3: I'm concerned that not only we kind of look at what happens when we're left out of something like this, but also what's happening as communities surrounding us are being included in this.

[0:08:21] Voice 3: and we're suddenly becoming this island of single-family homes in the middle of an area

[0:08:28] Voice 3: that's having only greater increased density. So I'm actually concerned, too, that we're going to

[0:08:34] Voice 3: be seeing more pressure on our local housing market and intensifying crises that we're only

[0:08:41] Voice 3: experiencing. So there's two sides to this bill. I listened to Adam Olson's nearly two-hour speech

[0:08:53] Voice 3: in the ledge floor on Bill 44. He started with, I'll summarize for anyone who doesn't want to

[0:09:00] Voice 3: stick around for two hours, says we're getting exactly the results of the system that we created

[0:09:06] Voice 8: energy anyway

[0:09:14] Voice 3: i was honored to attend last week's abattoir birthday celebration it's great to see

[0:09:20] Voice 3: our abattoir lasting this long but guess what without housing they're at risk too

[0:09:26] Voice 3: and that's my report hey thank you for that next is the chair's report um so i'll report uh

[0:09:36] Voice 3: last week um busy week for myself and a couple of the local trustees here were also part of these

[0:09:44] Voice 3: meetings there was a trust programs committee meeting which we got updates on the projected

[0:09:52] Voice 3: timeline for the new draft of the trust policy statement discussed stewardship education program

[0:10:01] Voice 3: which will be focused on groundwater and wildfire prevention and mitigation in the next year i think

[0:10:09] Voice 3: those those topics are both fairly relevant across the trust area um financial planning

[0:10:17] Voice 3: committee met and working on the early drafts of the uh 20 24 25 budget we'll be having a

[0:10:27] Voice 3: more discussion at trust council in december uh on that first first uh blocks of the of the budget

[0:10:34] Voice 3: there certainly inflationary pressures um are reflected in those birth those birth graphs and

[0:10:42] Voice 3: we'll see what what trust council recommends to financial planning committee and then uh

[0:10:48] Voice 3: and how that plays out uh by the time we uh reach the budget deadline at the end of march

[0:10:54] Voice 3: there'll be a second round of trust council eyes on the budget at the marsh trust council meeting

[0:11:00] Voice 3: um governance committee also met last week um working through our work program

[0:11:09] Voice 3: uh based on the recommendations from the great northern management uh governance report of 2022

[0:11:17] Voice 3: um despite uh being presented with a bunch of very sort of thorny issues to model through

[0:11:26] Voice 3: the governance committee has has made uh uh some progress um in uh september i think i mentioned

[0:11:34] Voice 3: uh at our previous meeting but september the rest council did uh um endorse uh a statement

[0:11:41] Voice 3: on the object of the island's trust um so that reflected uh one thing that the governance

[0:11:48] Voice 3: committee can can take off our list we still have a bunch of very consequential issues to work

[0:11:53] Voice 3: and I'm very happy that we have a governance committee

[0:11:58] Voice 3: that's actually doing this work.

[0:11:59] Voice 3: This is last term,

[0:12:05] Voice 3: the governance committee was established

[0:12:07] Voice 3: in June of the final year of the term

[0:12:09] Voice 3: and only managed to meet twice before the end of the term.

[0:12:13] Voice 3: So this is still new territory for Islands Trust

[0:12:16] Voice 3: but it's important work.

[0:12:21] Voice 3: Mentioned December Trust Council's coming up in Victoria.

[0:12:25] Voice 3: trustee patrick uh spoke a bit about uh bill 44 certainly was a topic of uh discussion and

[0:12:33] Voice 3: interest last night at the town hall session uh at the golf club there and really appreciate

[0:12:39] Voice 3: salt spring islanders coming out and and uh letting us uh the local trust committee um

[0:12:46] Voice 3: hear their thoughts last night it's very important part of of our decision making process

[0:12:52] Voice 3: process. Also just mentioned briefly the other provincial bill that came out in first reading

[0:13:04] Voice 3: of October 16th, the Bill 35 on the Short-Term Rental Accommodations Act. This is a bill

[0:13:11] Voice 3: that actually does have effect in the Islands Trust area unlike so many of the other provincial

[0:13:19] Voice 3: programs and funding schemes and our advice at this point is that local trust committees

[0:13:28] Voice 3: will have the option to opt in to the provincial residence requirement for short-term vacation

[0:13:36] Voice 3: accommodations and i think one of the things that stood out for me

[0:13:40] Voice 3: Is that where local trust committees may choose to limit short-term vacation rentals, the long-standing issue of non-conforming rentals not being enforceable against?

[0:14:06] Voice 3: The non-performing use authorities are not going to be extant any longer for short-term vacation rentals.

[0:14:16] Voice 3: So that has potential certainly on Hornby Island, which is considering not allowing any further short-term vacation rentals.

[0:14:26] Voice 3: They sort of have a wide open policy right now.

[0:14:29] Voice 3: So that could actually have an impact on the number of short-term vacation rentals.

[0:14:34] Voice 3: So the legacy rentals now are no longer just sort of in perpetuity allowed to stay non-conforming if that's the will of the local trust committees there.

[0:14:48] Voice 3: So I think that's all I'm going to report on today.

[0:14:53] Voice 3: And I see we have our CRD director and the LCC chair here.

[0:14:58] Voice 3: So I'd like to give both of you guys a chance to give us a little report if you'd like.

[0:15:10] Voice 3: He said he had nothing to report today.

[0:15:14] Voice 3: So why don't you go ahead, Gary, and then Earl, you go next.

[0:15:18] Voice 3: Yeah, thanks, Chair, and Earl may

[0:15:21] Voice 10: want to comment on or correct what I'm saying.

[0:15:26] Voice 10: Regarding housing, just quickly, regarding one of the presenters, the C3 is in now, the

[0:15:35] Voice 10: the hospital foundation has purchased the seed reason they are now proceeding with renovations

[0:15:40] Voice 10: there's been a hang up because some of the tenants there refuse to move on so that's 17 units that

[0:15:47] Voice 10: will be made available for health workers my understanding is sometime this year it would be

[0:15:53] Voice 10: available so they're raising on news there regarding the provincial legislation um

[0:16:04] there's and there's also the the announcement of the sweet consensus which we were also excluded

[0:16:10] Voice 10: from crd uh will be requesting inclusion in that program understanding from mla olsen

[0:16:18] Voice 10: is that it's a pilot and uh the province wants to see you know what the take-up is like

[0:16:25] Voice 10: and MLA Olsen believes there may be a possibility of being rooted in that

[0:16:32] Voice 10: program later on the province get some evidence about how or whether it's working

[0:16:39] Voice 10: Chair Peterson mentioned the short-term vacation rental legislation so the the province is

[0:16:48] Voice 10: instituting a mandatory registry for short-term rentals that applies province-wide and you have

[0:16:56] Voice 10: to declare that registration number for doing the advertising the province has also hired

[0:17:02] Voice 10: staff to monitor and enforce those regulations so it's not just a law that local governments

[0:17:10] Voice 10: have to enforce that should help with enforcement and in terms of the owner occupation as chair

[0:17:15] Voice 10: Peterson said uh we believe it's the local trust committee that requests inclusion in that

[0:17:22] Voice 10: provision the CRD will also be weighing in on that will also be doing that um

[0:17:29] Voice 10: and uh the CRD itself um uh CRD staff will be presenting to the board next month uh a rural

[0:17:42] Voice 10: housing program or strategy which will have implications for salt springs so the kinds of

[0:17:54] Voice 10: things they're considering are a dedicated coordinator position for electoral areas

[0:17:59] Voice 10: in the crd the crd is also considering swede incentives which actually might be more

[0:18:09] Voice 10: attractive as i understand if the provincial suite incentive you you basically have to build

[0:18:15] Voice 10: a brand new suite in order to qualify so that that's a pretty high bar to meet whereas i

[0:18:20] Voice 10: believe the crd incentive uh could include for example if you've got a basement information

[0:18:26] Voice 10: that needs just some additions you know perhaps lower costs that that probably qualifies so

[0:18:34] Voice 10: So we'll hear about that in December.

[0:18:36] Voice 10: And by the way, our next LCC meeting,

[0:18:39] Voice 10: November 23rd, CRD staff will be presenting

[0:18:44] Voice 10: on the Rural Housing Program.

[0:18:46] Voice 10: It'll be at a pretty general level,

[0:18:48] Voice 10: but those discussions will continue

[0:18:51] Voice 10: as that program unfolds.

[0:18:55] Voice 10: Another aspect of the Rural Housing Strategy

[0:18:58] Voice 10: may be pre-development or so-called PDF dollars,

[0:19:02] Voice 10: which are hard to get and those are the those are the dollars that proponents need to do the

[0:19:08] Voice 10: due diligence on the property feasibility work determining the availability of water which is

[0:19:16] Voice 10: a problem in the north salt spring service area so that that could be helpful here and then finally

[0:19:22] Voice 10: as i've indicated before here the crd will be initiating a voter approval process for

[0:19:29] Voice 10: or $85 million in borrowing.

[0:19:32] Voice 10: Salisbury is a participant in that service.

[0:19:35] Voice 10: And my understanding is part of a rural housing program

[0:19:38] Voice 10: will propose a certain portion of those dollars

[0:19:42] Voice 10: be allocated to electoral areas,

[0:19:45] Voice 10: which we've not had a specific pot of money

[0:19:49] Voice 10: to apply to before.

[0:19:51] Voice 10: And the CRD has already met with the minister

[0:19:53] Voice 10: requesting BC Housing to match that $85 million

[0:19:56] Voice 10: on a two-to-one basis.

[0:19:57] Voice 10: And they'll also be going to CMHC. If they're successful, that will create a large fund that Salisbury historically has benefited before and hopefully will continue to benefit from.

[0:20:15] Voice 10: again on the housing front um the gulf island seniors residence association which owns and

[0:20:24] Voice 10: operates meadow brook uh it will be applying to bc housing for funding for its king's lane project

[0:20:33] Voice 10: today the application

[0:20:34] Voice 10: that project was or that property was resold by the trust so

[0:20:39] Voice 10: So the trust is playing its role there.

[0:20:42] Voice 10: It's being reconfigured.

[0:20:45] Voice 10: So it's not just going to be, as I understand it,

[0:20:47] Voice 10: a senior's housing, but that will, A,

[0:20:51] Voice 10: I think it will be more beneficial for the community.

[0:20:54] Voice 10: It can still include seniors,

[0:20:56] Voice 10: but also by reconfiguring the project,

[0:21:01] Voice 10: they have to do that in order to be eligible

[0:21:03] Voice 10: for the BC Housing Grant Program to meet its criteria.

[0:21:07] Voice 10: So I think that will be a good move from several respects.

[0:21:14] Voice 10: Kind of related to housing, people may be aware of Drake Road.

[0:21:20] Voice 10: So Drake Road is now leased to BC Housing for 60 years.

[0:21:24] Voice 10: They're still committed to doing the 28-unit supported housing development there.

[0:21:30] Voice 10: In my view, they kind of fumbled that ball, but they're still committed to doing the project.

[0:21:36] Voice 10: um and they are responsible for managing the property the gate was left down and

[0:21:42] Voice 10: folks and campers and vans and tents that moved on the property bc housing has now

[0:21:49] Voice 10: essentially evicted those folks um i requested vc housing to consider an encampment on great

[0:21:56] Voice 10: road until the supported housing project was underway they are not willing to do that they

[0:22:06] Voice 10: don't support encampments they won't support encampments anywhere else on salt spring

[0:22:13] Voice 10: and i've also asked all the ngos if they would consider managing an encampment some of those

[0:22:19] Voice 10: NGOs like Dean Road Community Services just brought a property next to Kirkworthy. Those

[0:22:27] Voice 10: NGOs are also unwilling to manage an encampment so it continues to be a difficulty there.

[0:22:39] Voice 10: Again related to housing, the Southern Gulf Islands Tourism Partnership is an entity that

[0:22:47] Voice 10: It was created a number of years ago, in part due to the efforts of our then Community Economic Development Commission.

[0:22:57] Voice 10: Randy Cunningham, who was a commissioner along with Laura, instrumental in creating that entity, which receives a 2% so-called hotel tax on accommodation of various kinds.

[0:23:17] Voice 10: Visitors contribute 2% of their bill for that accommodation to the Southern Gulf Islands Tourism Partnership.

[0:23:27] Voice 10: The Tourism Partnership is now beginning to spend money on housing, including a Housing Now program,

[0:23:34] Voice 10: which until recently was just being applied in the Southern Gulf Islands, is now being applied in Salisbury.

[0:23:42] Voice 10: they'll be a salt spring coordinator and the it's basically a matching program that matches

[0:23:48] Voice 10: available housing with folks looking for housing uh in fact we're going to have a meeting later

[0:23:55] Voice 10: today um with the group with the housing now group to talk about um an approach on salt spring

[0:24:04] Voice 10: the lcc has identified employee housing as our top economic development priority so that that

[0:24:11] Voice 10: That is something that we probably will be indicating to the Housing Now folks.

[0:24:16] Voice 10: We'd like there to be an emphasis here on matching employees with housing.

[0:24:26] Voice 10: Also, the tourism partnership has already committed $100,000 a year to the CRD Rural Housing Program, probably to fund that coordinating position.

[0:24:37] Voice 10: So again, it's visitors helping to support affordable housing initiatives in the two electoral areas to which it applies.

[0:24:51] Voice 10: They also have a reserve of surplus monies.

[0:24:54] Voice 10: They've accumulated at this point about $200,000, which they're also going to be allocating to affordable housing.

[0:25:02] Voice 10: So, for example, that funding could be used for pre-development work, PDF works.

[0:25:08] Voice 10: So these discussions are continuing.

[0:25:11] Voice 10: The five-year plan for the tourism partnership is going to be renewed next year,

[0:25:22] Voice 10: and they are in discussions with the LCC about what that plan will look like for Saltspring.

[0:25:32] Voice 10: So those discussions, we need to, the Tourism Partnership needs to confirm that plan by the spring of next year.

[0:25:42] Voice 10: So we have some time to discuss, negotiate with the Tourism Partnership what their housing initiatives are going to look like.

[0:25:54] Voice 10: there are two um there are two voter approval processes that the lcc is uh proposing and

[0:26:04] Voice 10: only want to comment on that one is for the pool envelope which because of the nature of the beast

[0:26:11] Voice 10: the chlorine heavy um air in the pool uh is deteriorating the building envelope if we don't

[0:26:20] Voice 10: deal with that we won't have a pool so that that would require voter approval and the other

[0:26:27] Voice 10: voter approval process that the LCC is proposing is a dewatering facility for our liquid waste so

[0:26:37] Voice 10: right now Salt Spring spends about six hundred thousand dollars a year sending our liquid waste

[0:26:43] Voice 10: off-island, it goes to Burgoyne, it's like a transfer station and then shipped off-island.

[0:26:51] Voice 10: That liquid waste is 98.5% water, and so if we can de-water it and reduce the volumes

[0:26:58] Voice 10: that we have to ship off-island or even better find out a beneficial use on-island, an upfront

[0:27:05] Voice 10: investment that voters would have to approve, the port of money to establish the facility

[0:27:11] Voice 10: that it would have a pretty rapid payoff for that service.

[0:27:21] Voice 10: November, I'm jumping around here, Chair, a little bit.

[0:27:25] Voice 10: On November 26th, there's gonna be a food summit,

[0:27:27] Voice 10: which I suspect trustees have been invited to as well,

[0:27:31] Voice 10: various stakeholders in the agricultural community

[0:27:34] Voice 10: to assess our progress or lack of on food security

[0:27:40] Voice 10: for salt spring um the crd environment committee yesterday supported my motion

[0:27:47] Voice 10: to request a staff report on the merits of joining a class action suit against uh five of the largest

[0:27:58] Voice 10: oil companies in the world a number of jurisdictions have engaged in this class action

[0:28:05] Voice 10: including most recently California, in which these various jurisdictions are using the courts to try and force oil companies to deal with the economic impacts of climate change.

[0:28:23] Voice 10: And finally, the CRD budget, I don't think I've reported on that before, but the provisional or interim budget being proposed by CRD, and this includes LCC services, the provisional budget increase at this point is 9.6%.

[0:28:40] Voice 10: It's going to be another difficult year.

[0:28:44] Voice 10: That 9.6% includes LCC delegated services.

[0:28:49] Voice 10: And the main factors behind that are wage and salary, new co-chaired wage and salary

[0:28:55] Voice 10: increases in the order with more than 5%.

[0:28:59] Voice 10: The cost of leasing and maintaining, running the middle school, or this building, sorry,

[0:29:06] Voice 10: sorry, not this building, that building, were higher than expected.

[0:29:11] Voice 10: And also, we still have some deficit carriers from COVID.

[0:29:15] Voice 10: So COVID really hampered our transit service, transit services throughout D.C.

[0:29:22] Voice 10: And that, and also folks in rec programs, for example, like the Saturday market,

[0:29:31] Voice 10: at um the covert really impacted the revenues from those services and resulted in deficit carryovers

[0:29:40] Voice 10: that we've got to deal with in the next year that that's my report chair thanks i don't know if earl

[0:29:45] Voice 10: on any additional comments thank you gary thank

[0:29:50] Voice 3: you to the citizens group for coming today um

[0:29:53] Voice 3: to support more housing on the island, which is hugely important.

[0:29:57] Voice 3: And as I think Terry has clearly indicated, the LCC.

[0:30:00] Voice 3: It's really watching the housing matters and problems on the island very closely, recognizing that there are structural limits to what we can do, but that we think there are some things that we can do.

[0:30:11] Voice 3: We put our voice in and full support of the legislation and vacancy tax, which we hope will come here.

[0:30:18] Voice 3: We're looking very closely at monitoring Bill 44 and some of the other changes to short-term vacation rental management,

[0:30:27] Voice 3: management which is coming and looking for ways in which we might be able to support that in any

[0:30:32] Voice 3: way we could to help improve our housing situation on the island as gary mentioned we will be having

[0:30:38] Voice 3: um crd housing speaking to us at our meeting on the 23rd everyone is welcome to attend um that

[0:30:44] Voice 3: will be the first presentation on the agenda so if you're put off by our history at length

[0:30:51] Voice 3: I would welcome you all to attend um but right now the big item on our agenda is the budget

[0:30:58] Voice 3: which here is

[0:30:59] Voice 10: intimated and laid out in some detail it's been a very useful budget year

[0:31:04] Voice 10: especially for a new commission coming in in the middle of the fiscal year and we've got deficits

[0:31:11] Voice 10: coming forward rolling forward from the COVID pandemic and the impact of inflation across the

[0:31:17] Voice 10: board on pretty much everything in wages supplies equipment um so we're looking at some serious um

[0:31:24] Voice 3: budgetary increases i think our goal as now we've been trying to sustain existing services

[0:31:32] Voice 3: at the level where they're at and try and find ways to either hold back defer or find alternative

[0:31:38] Voice 3: funding for increases that have been requested that's a work in progress and a few of our

[0:31:44] Voice 3: meeting and fit in past the housing presentation we'll be diving deeply into the budget once again

[0:31:51] Voice 3: we welcome input from all members of the public on this budget because it hits us all

[0:31:57] Voice 3: um i'd also remind folks that um the lcc commissioner holding open office hours

[0:32:04] Voice 3: everyone from 8 30 in the morning to 4 30 in the afternoon at the crd offices on the coast

[0:32:10] Voice 10: um

[0:32:11] Voice 10: we're taking turns the four of us sitting there through the day welcoming constituents just walk

[0:32:16] Voice 10: in whatever concerns

[0:32:17] Voice 3: you have whatever you want to talk about we will be there and we welcome you

[0:32:23] Voice 3: your attendance um i expect we will be coming forward with a lot more detail as we look

[0:32:29] Voice 3: at a final budget which hopefully will be coming up in the next couple of months and

[0:32:35] Voice 3: like gary said we do have a couple of substantial um asks for long-term capital funding

[0:32:41] Voice 3: which we find um essential he's already touched upon the major points but our liquid waste costs

[0:32:48] Voice 3: are getting out of control and we can we can pay back the initial investment on that upgrade

[0:32:55] Voice 3: in a number of years that seemed like uh an obvious task for us to take on and the pool

[0:33:01] Voice 3: quite frankly um humidity and chlorine in that building we haven't gone and we know it's something

[0:33:07] Voice 3: people so with that i will leave it um and thank you for having us here today

[0:33:16] Voice 3: thank you moving on in our agenda we have um uh 8.1 on page five we have the draft minutes

[0:33:25] Voice 3: of the october 12th regular meeting for adoption any corrections additions to that for the minutes

[0:33:33] Voice 3: no i go over carefully excellent job marvelous uh we do not have a resident

[0:33:41] Voice 3: and that brings us over to section nine of a number of items of correspondence and unless um

[0:33:54] Voice 3: unless there's interest in uh highlighting any of them i note that there's uh um

[0:34:03] Voice 3: uh the letter to minister conroy unfortunately um there's a minor mistake because it says

[0:34:10] Voice 3: minister of housing when of course he's minister of finance small embarrassing error but the

[0:34:16] Voice 3: letter's already been sent so that's that and was there something well i was going to say

[0:34:22] Voice 3: i mean do you just correct that and send it again or leave it as is it just it does look a little

[0:34:31] Voice 3: on well for the record i mean we could hear from staff we could uh um but as far as sending it

[0:34:39] Voice 3: again i mean i don't know if that's this is worth the effort which uh which letter the letter to

[0:34:47] Voice 3: minister conroy it actually says uh minister of housing oh that's on the header it's it's

[0:34:53] Voice 3: as i say i mean i i think the letter's already been sent off it's just kind of an embarrassing

[0:34:59] Voice 3: a mistake but that was pointed out by members of the public so i'm just sure we're happy to use um

[0:35:06] Voice 3: email um noting the error um that helps okay i think that would be no any objections to that

[0:35:14] Voice 3: notion no okay we can recognize that so they don't put all those guys

[0:35:17] Voice 3: who their ministers are right uh so is there any other items on their correspondence that

[0:35:23] Voice 3: want anything to raise okay so that brings us to section 10 we have a follow-up action list on

[0:35:30] Voice 3: page 30 and i'll look to step up first for any updates and then if there's questions from

[0:35:35] Voice 3: trustees no

[0:35:39] Voice 8: updates no updates okay any questions from trustees um

[0:35:49] Voice 3: yeah well i guess um you know

[0:35:53] Voice 3: there were a few minutes from last week we talked about a couple of older um resolutions that hadn't

[0:35:59] Voice 3: been responded to and i understand that we may get a report in december on sort of watershed

[0:36:03] Voice 3: protection and that sort of status and some of those promotions related to that right

[0:36:12] Voice 3: um i said in the minutes from our conversation or from last meeting we talked about some older

[0:36:19] Voice 3: resolutions that have not been acted upon um that are also related to the watershed and i

[0:36:24] Voice 3: i believe we'll have a report next month on the watershed we are currently um accelerating our

[0:36:32] Voice 3: work around um both the watershed sustainability project and the uh so-called work plan um so we'll

[0:36:41] Voice 3: have a bit of a um roadmap and planning i'm going to proceed with those items so um any historic

[0:36:48] historic

[0:36:48] Voice 3: items that I would be more about the western watershed and trying to organize

[0:36:59] Voice 3: a meeting with polis on um possible opportunities with that watershed um that it was in the

[0:37:10] Voice 3: minutes last you you said you would look back into it so that's why but to me it's related

[0:37:15] Voice 3: it so hopefully it can be covered caught from that presentation next month okay then um we have

[0:37:25] Voice 3: no community information or public hearing i think it's uh we're a little bit ahead of the game so i

[0:37:31] Voice 3: think it's been too early to break until noon um we have a number of applications but uh in case

[0:37:38] Voice 3: there's applicants that want to address us i think we should keep them hold them till noon and um

[0:37:48] Voice 3: Yes, sir.

[0:37:50] Voice 3: Suggestions would be to move to the in-camera session at this time or potentially new business event in camera.

[0:38:01] Voice 3: That's items that we could address before noon that won't impact any of the items.

[0:38:09] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:38:09] Voice 3: But that's just a suggestion.

[0:38:11] Voice 3: Suggestion and trustee.

[0:38:12] Voice 3: We have one of the applicants sitting in the room.

[0:38:15] Voice 3: Maybe we could deal with the one applicant so he doesn't have to come back later.

[0:38:19] Voice 3: I'm just perfectly happy to do that. We can we can leave the rest till afternoon if that's that's well and everything in camera. So I was gonna say, yeah, do that.

[0:38:28] Voice 1: We can leave

[0:38:28] Voice 3: the rest of the application. So let's do that. I'd

[0:38:32] Voice 3: rather come back later.

[0:38:33] Voice 3: I might come back later,

[0:38:35] Voice 11: but I don't think I'm getting one.

[0:38:37] Voice 3: Okay, so help you out here because I don't know the 13.5. It's 13.5. Okay, so as as dp 2023.9 on page 134.

[0:38:47] Voice 3: work okay i'm just working with staff just to say to the staff i'm sure that person chris

[0:38:56] Voice 3: okay and yes and of course assuming that we can raise the staff person and and if if not then

[0:39:03] Voice 3: well we will have to wait but uh just reaching out to a mr chair so um if he's not already on the

[0:39:09] Voice 3: zoom um do we want to for the sake of the time efficiency we'll look at some of the new business

[0:39:18] Voice 3: and then come back to this?

[0:39:22] Voice 3: We'd have to grab another planner

[0:39:23] Voice 3: for one of the business items

[0:39:24] Voice 3: that we might have right now.

[0:39:27] Voice 3: The reason I was sitting at the camera

[0:39:29] Voice 3: is because I know I have

[0:39:31] Voice 3: managing the event.

[0:39:33] Voice 3: Right.

[0:39:33] Voice 3: The trustees,

[0:39:37] Voice 3: the staff for the other items.

[0:39:40] Voice 3: Okay, well,

[0:39:41] Voice 3: let's also jump on here.

[0:39:43] Voice 8: He is ready? Okay, well, let's proceed

[0:39:45] Voice 8: with this then.

[0:40:19] Voice 8: Chris, you're welcome to begin your presentation.

[0:40:38] Voice 3: We

[0:40:38] Voice 7: are ready to proceed with the development permit here?

[0:40:41] Voice 3: Yes,

[0:40:41] Voice 7: sir. Please go ahead.

[0:40:42] Voice 7: Perfect. We have an application for a development permit under the Island Villages Permit Area for a...

[0:40:49] Voice 7: Oh, can you guys hear me?

[0:40:52] Voice 7: Yes.

[0:40:52] Voice 7: Oh, okay. Sorry. I have two streams on. Let me just fix this up.

[0:40:58] Voice 7: All right. Sorry about that.

[0:40:59] Voice 7: We have an application for a development permit under the Island Villages Permit Area for a property on Jackson Avenue.

[0:41:04] Voice 7: While the property is restricted from further development by a covenant registered on the property title, land clearing and alteration is still permitted.

[0:41:11] Voice 7: While staff work with the applicant to secure a sidewalk agreement with the external agencies which would effectively remove the covenant restriction,

[0:41:18] Voice 7: the applicant is proposing to remove the vegetation, including brush, a danger tree, and invasive Himalayan blackberry.

[0:41:24] Voice 7: While removal of this vegetation within the property boundaries would not always require a development permit, when removal is considered within a building setback area, this requirement for a development permit is triggered.

[0:41:37] Voice 7: Based on staff analysis, only two of 95 development permit guidelines are applicable.

[0:41:42] Voice 7: This is due really to the narrow scope of removal only, while most guidelines are catered towards development or site layout.

[0:41:48] Voice 7: out so based on the guidelines being met and no anticipated negative impact to the neighborhood

[0:41:53] Voice 7: staff recommend approval of the permit as proposed and i do understand the applicant is in attendance

[0:41:58] Voice 7: today if ltc has any questions great

[0:42:03] Voice 3: thank you for that report um did you want to speak to the

[0:42:07] Voice 3: application or just see if there's questions i just want to get going okay any questions for

[0:42:14] Voice 3: the planner or the applicant today no i'm just glad the other 95 or 93 didn't apply okay yes

[0:42:21] Voice 3: this does seem fairly straightforward so we have a recommendation here i'm willing to make motion

[0:42:26] Voice 3: i move that the salt spring island trust committee approved issuance development permit ssdp 2023.9

[0:42:34] Voice 3: uh so moved do i have a seconder

[0:42:36] Voice 8: i'll second the motion uh discussion no discussion

[0:42:47] Voice 3: All right. That being the case, I will call the question.

[0:42:52] Voice 3: Then all those in favor, any opposed, would you like your opposition noted?

[0:42:57] Voice 3: Please. Okay, that motion carries and and so we'll hold the rest of the applications until new chair.

[0:43:10] Voice 3: Yes, sir, you know, is available, and you'd like to proceed with.

[0:43:14] Voice 3: item 15. oh okay let's do that then let's go to item 15. so that's the housing agreement file on

[0:43:26] Voice 3: number four four seven on page 202.

[0:43:40] Voice 8: yes and i do apologize

[0:43:42] Voice 3: i know there have been widespread um

[0:43:45] Voice 3: connectivity issues so i know that that's been affecting the plan is in the capital area as well

[0:43:50] Voice 3: as our staff on sultan island so um you may find things a little bit spotty uh during

[0:43:56] Voice 3: in on my presentation today but he is is able

[0:44:01] Voice 8: to join us today okay well mr petito has also

[0:44:22] Voice 8: advised that um there is an applicant um that

[0:44:26] Voice 3: won't be would be here in the afternoon um so

[0:44:29] Voice 3: it is up to oh that won't be here today well they should be here in the afternoon um so you may want

[0:44:36] Voice 3: to wait until this afternoon yeah oh for the further applications for the housing agreement

[0:44:42] Voice 3: agreement as a request oh I

[0:44:43] Voice 3: see for the things they got or not okay um okay I'm I'm content to

[0:44:51] Voice 3: wait then okay on that we do have uh two other items of new business maybe we could look at

[0:44:56] Voice 3: those instead um uh 15.2 we have dust and bone screening on page 240. um which is was based I

[0:45:12] Voice 3: i suppose on the uh email uh elect october 11th for myself um i believe we discussed this

[0:45:25] Voice 3: oh i guess maybe we didn't discuss this in a meeting um but i believe that uh trustee

[0:45:31] Voice 3: patrick indicated that there has been a screening of that film no no it's just it's old i mean we

[0:45:38] Voice 3: discussed it last term. I mean, this was an organized, like a week after the pandemic was

[0:45:43] Voice 3: declared, so it was canceled. And now I think the film is getting a little old. I think we should

[0:45:51] Voice 3: do something else. Certainly, if there's not interest in LTC to proceed with the screening,

[0:45:59] Voice 3: I was bringing this forward from executive committee, just because it's still on the

[0:46:06] Voice 3: the EC work program.

[0:46:08] Voice 3: So if there's not an interest from the LTC

[0:46:13] Voice 3: to proceed with the screening,

[0:46:14] Voice 3: we can just let the EC know that

[0:46:16] Voice 3: and trust the area services know that and proceed.

[0:46:22] Voice 3: Yes.

[0:46:26] Voice 3: So when was it to be screened?

[0:46:28] Voice 3: It was supposed to be screened.

[0:46:30] Voice 3: Well, this is how old this is.

[0:46:32] Voice 3: This was supposed to be screened a few weeks

[0:46:34] Voice 3: into the pandemic, I believe.

[0:46:35] Voice 3: March of 2019, when was it?

[0:46:39] Voice 3: 2020 yeah yeah 2020 so this is this is sort of old business and and one of the reasons i

[0:46:47] Voice 3: sent the email was because it's still sitting on the ec work program and trust area services and uh

[0:46:56] Voice 3: uh somewhere on salt spring i don't know an appropriate location on salt spring that would be

[0:47:01] Voice 3: to be determined but um um it was going to be at arc spring it's on youtube it's

[0:47:08] Voice 3: publicly available that will be as well uh so yeah so it's if there's if there's still interest in

[0:47:19] Voice 3: in screening it here there was a grant in aid um provided to to provide funding for that but if

[0:47:26] Voice 3: there's not interest in that then we can they can just put that back into their um

[0:47:32] Voice 8: history

[0:47:33] Voice 8: and heritage grant fund i think deferred this yes would

[0:47:42] Voice 3: probably defer this with

[0:47:44] Voice 3: on the meeting possibly uh we certainly can um i don't i mean there's no particular urgency around

[0:47:52] Voice 3: this uh as i say i just brought it up because it's still sitting on some some other committee's work

[0:47:58] Voice 3: programs and uh before i'm making any changes there i wanted to check in with salt spring

[0:48:03] Voice 3: because that's one of the two two uh ltc's on the list that wanted to have that

[0:48:10] Voice 3: so so i have no

[0:48:11] Voice 3: problem watching i'd love to see it i'm not sure i don't think there's any

[0:48:16] Voice 3: particular problem there's no urgency for dealing with it today um i don't have any problem with the

[0:48:23] Voice 3: deferring it to another meeting the request that staff organized two film screenings um yes for

[0:48:30] Voice 3: this film i may be missing something here is this directly related to the business of a local trust

[0:48:35] Voice 3: committee from the honest trust in general um i don't know that it was the that it would have

[0:48:41] Voice 3: been local trust committee staff or whether it would have been trust area services staff i'm not

[0:48:45] Voice 3: i'm not actually can't answer that question at the moment um uh at any rate it's it's historical i

[0:48:55] Voice 3: brought it as i say because it's been sitting there on on the work program for a long time

[0:49:00] Voice 3: where we're trying to clean up some of our of our follow-up actions so um i'm i think it's perfectly

[0:49:06] Voice 3: reasonable to defer it and then uh trustee harris maybe you can just let me know um in advance of

[0:49:13] Voice 3: our next meeting uh and then we can we can decide in fact if we wanted to i think this is one of

[0:49:19] Voice 3: those items that if we wanted to dispose of this by resolution without meeting um in between that

[0:49:24] Voice 3: would probably not require a lot of conversation yeah so if you're if you're keen yeah to have it

[0:49:32] Voice 3: happen here then let me know and if you're if you think it's we'll find to just let it

[0:49:38] Voice 3: go then we'll just make sure that we let trust programs and the executive know

[0:49:43] Voice 3: all right and so the other item is uh 15.3 bill 44 um trustee harris and trustee patrick both

[0:49:53] Voice 3: have thoughts on this so who would like to make a motion all right uh we'll entertain a motion

[0:50:00] Voice 3: i move the salt spring island ltc direct staff to draft a letter on the ltc's behalf asking the

[0:50:07] Voice 3: province to include salt spring island under the umbrella of bill 44 and that staff send a letter

[0:50:13] Voice 3: to the minister of housing and the premier of ec's office marked important and urgent no leader

[0:50:18] Voice 3: or November 1st.

[0:50:23] Voice 8: So moved.

[0:50:24] Voice 8: And did we get it?

[0:50:28] Voice 11: Over to you.

[0:50:31] Voice 11: I emailed it to you.

[0:50:33] Voice 8: You have a copy of it?

[0:50:35] Voice 8: Okay.

[0:50:36] Voice 11: And if you

[0:50:37] Voice 8: agree with that,

[0:50:41] Voice 8: I'll make sense of that.

[0:50:46] Voice 8: Well, I'll second

[0:50:47] Voice 3: it.

[0:50:48] Voice 3: Moved and seconded.

[0:50:49] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:50:50] Voice 3: Should we have some discussion then?

[0:50:51] Voice 3: Trustee Patrick?

[0:50:52] Voice 3: Well, I wonder if we want to be more,

[0:50:55] Voice 3: because we are captured under the umbrella of it we are just excluded from the one section

[0:51:03] Voice 3: of it um that's

[0:51:09] Voice 8: the the density one did

[0:51:13] Voice 3: you did we

[0:51:14] Voice 8: agree to be more specific 100

[0:51:15] Voice 3: whatever we need to do um because i think that's

[0:51:26] Voice 3: is the intention that um this would apply to the salt spring local trust area that the request

[0:51:32] Voice 3: that could require okay so yeah

[0:51:34] Voice 8: people in

[0:51:35] Voice 3: addition would say that to request that

[0:51:37] Voice 3: salt spring local trust area be considered um similar to a municipality in the case of

[0:51:44] Voice 3: building for of a population greater than 10 000 yeah i think that would be the

[0:51:49] Voice 3: cut yeah as

[0:51:50] Voice 3: specific as possible should i amend that so so i'll just give me a moment and i'll

[0:51:54] Voice 3: get it up on okay at least this screen um the other thought i had is should we also be copying

[0:52:03] Voice 3: this to the minister of municipal affairs um well we can get to that i'm trying to work on that okay

[0:52:09] Voice 3: okay okay motion

[0:52:09] Voice 3: first then then the

[0:52:11] Voice 1: address is the

[0:52:11] Voice 3: motion to um strike the uh

[0:52:19] Voice 3: yeah yeah let me we have to say to remove um uh to amend the motion to remove

[0:52:28] Voice 3: under the umbrella of i think and replace it with include the salt spring island uh the local trust

[0:52:39] Voice 3: trust area in in bill 44 as like as a community as if it were a municipality with a population

[0:52:54] Voice 3: greater than 10 000. so I think that really is important if I could just clarify I say that

[0:53:02] Voice 3: because bill 44 um is in the bill itself actually defines local government um in the in the media

[0:53:10] Voice 3: yeah i was bothered to try to really set up managers and i was just read these things and

[0:53:16] Voice 3: said okay municipalities we're not municipalities so we're not going to be included it's a straight

[0:53:22] Voice 3: definition for us but the way that the bill is read there's an opportunity because it's a fairly

[0:53:27] Voice 3: simple amendment to add salt spring as a local trust area if they simply consider us to be

[0:53:42] Voice 3: Yeah, I mean, we could just copy it to the municipal affairs without having to amend the letter doing the motion would be gone.

[0:53:53] Voice 3: No.

[0:53:54] I'm saying, Mr. Chair, I just may be able to get this letter best come from the chair.

[0:54:01] Voice 3: uh not from from staff but uh so that would certainly facilitate the senator but it would

[0:54:09] Voice 3: be that the chair sent a letter um for the minister to further amend to you know make

[0:54:16] Voice 3: it a letter from the chair all

[0:54:22] Voice 8: right i make that amendment here's the chair yes

[0:54:26] Voice 8: okay and then as far as cc

[0:54:40] Voice 3: i mean it occurs to me that uh certainly the disturbing civil affairs be

[0:54:44] Voice 3: cc we need to specify that and i would also uh suggest that the mla olsen can we just do that

[0:54:54] Voice 3: as notes after the motion but as far as long as it's that's why the staff so it's a separate

[0:55:04] Voice 8: whatever or they're still wording over here okay it's not rob

[0:55:18] Voice 11: who's taking that for robson yeah

[0:55:21] Voice 8: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[0:55:22] Voice 11: So I just.

[0:55:24] Voice 3: Going to come.

[0:55:27] Voice 3: Now I can screen share.

[0:55:28] Voice 3: So it's determined.

[0:55:32] Voice 3: Hey, thank you.

[0:55:34] Voice 3: Yeah. Yeah.

[0:55:35] Voice 3: For those ministers, I guess they could throw in the new ministers.

[0:55:39] Voice 3: Better to those.

[0:55:40] Voice 3: And just, we always.

[0:55:43] Voice 3: CC the MLA.

[0:55:45] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:55:45] Voice 3: It doesn't need to be included.

[0:55:47] Voice 3: We need to be directed to who to address the letter to.

[0:55:49] Voice 3: to show not to cc the latter yeah so we can add that to the municipal affairs and all that so so

[0:55:54] Voice 3: that's good so I I'm making sure you make that amendment or are we calling that friendly I don't

[0:56:00] Voice 3: know I'm seeing

[0:56:02] Voice 3: that that's okay original mover because that's fine with me happy with the wording

[0:56:10] Voice 3: there seems to make sense I mean the main thing is if it works for staff yeah I think it's just

[0:56:21] Voice 3: that we're

[0:56:22] Voice 8: you're requesting that a chair send um a letter to those ministers requesting

[0:56:35] Voice 3: that we be

[0:56:36] Voice 3: included and it's also going to get lpa be including bill 44 that wouldn't spell like

[0:56:41] Voice 3: the population of 10 000. i think we've just got to oh

[0:56:45] Voice 8: yeah higher up i guess

[0:57:31] Voice 8: an ed in the official record here yeah all right we talked with the motion trustees

[0:57:46] Voice 8: okay any further discussion all right i'll call the question all those in favor and

[0:57:54] Voice 3: that carries

[0:57:57] Voice 3: okay so we're down to 30. um i'm gonna

[0:58:06] Voice 3: yeah suggest that we do the in-camera session next

[0:58:08] Voice 3: and that's going to get us closer to our reasonable break time.

[0:58:14] Voice 3: Mr. Chair, do we have an amended call for closure?

[0:58:19] Voice 3: Oh, we

[0:58:20] Voice 11: have an amended

[0:58:20] Voice 3: call for closure?

[0:58:21] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:58:23] Voice 3: Maybe you can get that up.

[0:58:26] Voice 8: Yes, sir.

[0:58:27] Voice 8: Yeah.

[0:58:47] Voice 3: Yeah, we've got plenty of other business.

[0:58:49] Voice 3: We're just trying to juggle the timing of it in a way that makes sense.

[0:58:53] Voice 3: for me

[0:58:54] Voice 11: that you weren't going to come back much did i misunderstand well

[0:58:58] Voice 3: let's back in once we're

[0:58:59] Voice 3: done oh yeah we'll when we're done with it in camera then we'll see if if there if it makes

[0:59:04] Voice 3: sense to do any more business before lunch or not it'll depend on how that well i like the time

[0:59:13] Voice 11: once

[0:59:13] Voice 3: the camera session is done the room will be open yeah

[0:59:18] Voice 11: yeah

[0:59:19] Voice 3: yeah okay great

[0:59:21] Voice 3: yeah okay

[0:59:25] Voice 8: you have the amended version there

[0:59:27] Voice 3: okay

[0:59:28] Voice 8: uh

[0:59:29] Voice 3: i'll move that the south spring island local trust committee closed this meeting

[0:59:33] Voice 3: subject to community charter section 91e the acquisition this disposition or expropriation

[0:59:41] Voice 3: of land or improvements if the council considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to

[0:59:48] Voice 3: harm the interests of the municipality and f law enforcement if the council considers that

[0:59:53] Voice 3: that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the conduct of the investigation

[1:00:00] Voice 3: or uh enforcement of enactment and that stuff in flight into maine so what page is this um so

[1:00:08] Voice 3: there was more and then uh and then jamie there's uh there's an added piece of

[1:00:21] Voice 3: papers adding okay yeah we're just adding because there's now two reasons that we're

[1:00:26] Voice 3: closing so we have to okay so uh we have a motion uh and seconded uh discussion

[1:00:34] Voice 3: All in favor. And that carries. So we're now moving into five minutes to the room.

[1:00:42] Voice 3: Do

[1:00:42] Voice 4: you want to have five minutes?

[1:00:43] Voice 3: Yeah, sure. OK, let's take five minutes before the start of the encounter.

[1:00:47] Voice 3: OK, totally reasonable. Let's take five minutes.

[1:48:08] Voice 3: Okay, thank you. So we're coming back from our break, and we're going to resume with

[1:48:16] Voice 3: applications and referrals and start at the 13.1 Cranberry Road on page 43.

[1:48:29] Voice 3: We have a planner Caprov online. Please go ahead and introduce the application.

[1:48:39] Voice 1: Good afternoon, Chair Peterson, Trustee Harris, and Trustee Patrick. The purpose of this

[1:48:44] Voice 1: application is to create a two lot bare land strata subdivision. The proposed bare land strata

[1:48:50] Voice 1: lots, proposed strata lot one and proposed strata lot two and the proposed limited common property

[1:48:55] Voice 1: to proposed strata lot two are sited outside of ALR land. Approximately 0.52 hectares or 1.3

[1:49:03] Voice 1: acres of ALR land is requested for highway access to proposed strata lot one and strata lot two

[1:49:10] Voice 1: via a common property access route.

[1:49:14] Voice 1: Staff recommend referral to the Agriculture Advisory Planning Committee

[1:49:17] Voice 1: for SSALR 2023.2 as per subsection B6.2.2.18 of the OCP,

[1:49:26] Voice 1: which recommends referral to the AAPC when subdivisions are proposed

[1:49:29] Voice 1: for land that drains toward agricultural land.

[1:49:32] Voice 1: The use is substantially consistent with land use regulations

[1:49:36] Voice 1: and the proposed subdivision is not anticipated to negatively impact existing and future

[1:49:41] Voice 1: agricultural production. The proposed access route utilizes an existing driveway,

[1:49:46] Voice 1: minimizing overall impact to ALR land. The applicant, I believe, is present.

[1:49:50] Voice 1: Should you have any questions for him? And thanks.

[1:49:55] Voice 3: Okay, thank you. And the applicant's here. And did you have anything you wanted to add or

[1:49:59] Voice 3: just a question? No, I think they were thrilled to find me as watch all that stuff. So

[1:50:07] Voice 3: Okay, trustees, any questions for the planner or the advocate?

[1:50:12] Voice 3: No, I mean, it's probably I'm glad I support sending it to the APC. I've run into some of the members sometimes. I say, when

[1:50:20] Voice 11: are you going to ever send anything to us?

[1:50:22] Voice 3: So I think they would like to know that we care about their input.

[1:50:25] Voice 3: But at some point, as I notice, because the ALR was always

[1:50:37] Voice 3: on the flatlands parts, but the properties were typically

[1:50:43] Voice 3: square or rectangular generally, they always

[1:50:47] Voice 3: end up being split zone.

[1:50:51] Voice 3: And I noticed that when we do subdivisions,

[1:50:55] Voice 3: it's always the split zone gets split out and gone.

[1:50:58] Voice 3: on and I think at some point whether it's now or as part of our OCP review that we're doing is

[1:51:03] Voice 3: again I'd like to get feedback from the AAPC on you know if that is that a good long-term

[1:51:12] Voice 3: direction to the island to say you know was a farm more traditionally the total of being the

[1:51:21] Voice 3: farmable land and then the non-farmable land is the part of the you know is that something that

[1:51:27] Voice 3: we should consider as a protection um going forward and you know as we take a look at the

[1:51:33] Voice 3: OCC if I'm making any sense um so I don't know if we need to have that question now but this

[1:51:40] Voice 3: is an example of the type of question I would have as we go into our OCP do we want to call

[1:51:46] Voice 3: you know be more protective of a farm being inclusive of the other you know the other zones

[1:51:54] Voice 3: zones of of land that got you know um because of just because of the ALR designation probably not

[1:52:05] Voice 3: making a lot of sense but I think you it occurs to me that uh LTC wanted to we could not to the

[1:52:13] Voice 3: ABC even in advance of getting into the well it's just an example of it and I think it's an

[1:52:20] Voice 3: interesting question as we start thinking about you know potential new you know review of our

[1:52:26] Voice 3: policy um but that might take some preparation for staff to bring those policies together and

[1:52:33] Voice 3: so forth so i don't just having this may not be the right time but it would be a good time to

[1:52:38] Voice 3: perhaps plan the seed any other questions for the planner or the applicant on the application

[1:52:47] Voice 3: okay i'm not seeing any we have a recommendation here for us

[1:52:57] Voice 3: I'll move that the South Spring Island Local Trust Committee refer application SSALR 2023.2

[1:53:04] Voice 3: to the Agricultural Advisory Planning Committee for comment on the application generally as well

[1:53:09] Voice 3: as specifically on the following aspects. The potential changes to existing drainage patterns

[1:53:16] Voice 3: with the creation of two bare land strata lots adjacent to ALR land property and the

[1:53:23] Voice 3: B, the proposed common road access on the ALR land

[1:53:27] Voice 3: for two bare land straddle lots and on non-ALR land,

[1:53:32] Voice 3: and C, whether the Salt Spring Animal Trust Committee

[1:53:35] Voice 3: should support the subdivision and non-farm use application.

[1:53:39] Voice 3: So moved.

[1:53:40] Voice 3: Do I have a seconder?

[1:53:41] Voice 3: No

[1:53:42] Voice 8: seconded.

[1:53:44] Voice 8: Discussion?

[1:53:46] Voice 8: No further discussion?

[1:53:48] Voice 8: In that case, I'll call the question.

[1:53:49] Voice 8: All in favor?

[1:53:51] Voice 8: And the motion carries.

[1:53:54] Voice 8: Thank you very much.

[1:54:04] Voice 8: brings us to 13

[1:54:08] Voice 3: .2 mountain park drive on page 54. okay and then there's also planner caprock

[1:54:17] Voice 3: this variance

[1:54:20] Voice 1: application is for several existing structures and buildings on the property

[1:54:24] Voice 1: um so the applicant is seeking to vary the maximum accessory building floor area of 70 square meters

[1:54:31] Voice 1: or 753.5 square feet for a lot less than 1.2 hectares or three acres to legalize an existing

[1:54:39] Voice 1: accessory building, which is noted as garage studio on the site plan, increasing the total

[1:54:45] Voice 1: accessory building floor area to 178 square meters or 1,916 square feet. The minimum setback

[1:54:53] Voice 1: from the interior side lot line from three meters or 9.8 feet to legalize an existing accessory

[1:54:58] Voice 1: structure noted as a shed on the site plan that is cited 2.8 meters or 9.2 feet from the interior

[1:55:05] Voice 1: side lot line and the maximum setback the minimum setback from the natural boundary of the sea from

[1:55:11] Voice 1: 15 meters or 49.2 feet to legalize an existing accessory structure gazebo which is cited 5.3

[1:55:19] Voice 1: meters or 17.4 feet from the natural boundary of the sea so try to keep this brief the application

[1:55:25] Voice 1: is proceeding because of a capital regional district CRD stop work order issued back in 2017

[1:55:31] Voice 1: for the garage studio development variance permit application to permit 178 square meters

[1:55:38] Voice 1: of accessory building area was presented at the February 18th 2020 Salt Spring LTC meeting

[1:55:45] Voice 1: the Salt Spring Island LTC denied issuance of the permit at the meeting a board of variance

[1:55:52] Voice 1: was applied for in 2022 and was eventually closed in 2023 due to inactivity. The planner

[1:55:58] Voice 1: provided the applicant with various options in order to proceed, which included proceed with

[1:56:04] Voice 1: a Board of Variants application for just the gazebo and the shed and to remove the garage studio,

[1:56:12] Voice 1: proceed with a Board of Variants application that includes the garage studio and provide rationale

[1:56:17] Voice 1: that all three variances would be considered minor and that by not granting these variances

[1:56:23] Voice 1: this would cause undue hardship or to reapply for a development variance permit that includes the

[1:56:30] Voice 1: gazebo shed and garage studio and then for this option the planner had recommended that the

[1:56:36] Voice 1: application should include a reduction in the overall floor area of the accessory buildings

[1:56:41] Voice 1: on the property and so the planner had suggested at that time the owner removed the existing garage

[1:56:46] Voice 1: garage and the gazebo to demonstrate that they were willing to work towards bylaw compliance.

[1:56:52] Voice 1: During the notification period, a letter of support was received from a neighboring property

[1:56:56] Voice 1: and staff recommend that the LTC deny issuance of SSDVP 2023.15 as the application as proposed

[1:57:06] Voice 1: is not considered a minor variance. The amount of accessory building area being sought is 2.5 times

[1:57:12] Voice 1: what is permitted under zoning. And from my planning perspective, there are no

[1:57:17] Voice 1: exceptional circumstances on the property that support the additional accessory building floor

[1:57:22] Voice 1: area. So if the application is denied, the applicant may pursue a border variance application.

[1:57:29] Voice 1: However, as has been communicated to the applicant, the onus is on them to demonstrate that

[1:57:34] Voice 1: the application is for a minor variance and that compliance with bylaw would result in undue

[1:57:39] Voice 1: hardship. And so I've also provided some alternatives to the resolution. So the LTC

[1:57:44] Voice 1: has a discretion to approve aspects of the application, or the permit, sorry, such as

[1:57:49] Voice 1: relaxation of the setback requirements for the gazebo and shed. And I believe the owner is here

[1:57:55] Voice 1: today to speak to the application. Thanks.

[1:57:58] Voice 3: Is the owner here today? Yes. Yes. Okay.

[1:58:03] Voice 3: Okay, did you want to add anything?

[1:58:05] Voice 3: Yes, I think we should have 1.96 acres of land

[1:58:13] Voice 3: and we're occupying under 10%.

[1:58:18] Voice 3: Sorry, excuse me, I'm sorry.

[1:58:25] Voice 3: The workshop is located in a crucial area.

[1:58:30] Voice 3: It's right in the middle of the property.

[1:58:32] Voice 3: You can't do it in

[1:58:34] Voice 3: any of the other adjacent properties.

[1:58:39] Voice 8: applications have never been contested by my neighbors they've given letters of support so

[1:58:51] Voice 3: studio the truck adds 625 square feet to the one

[1:58:57] Voice 3: that still exists in

[1:59:05] Voice 8: the property so we're not over crowding anything although you know

[1:59:13] Voice 8: So there's many, many structures in the area that occupy 25, 75% of it.

[1:59:26] Voice 8: And in the past application, I

[1:59:47] Voice 3: thought there was a little bit of an aspect to it.

[1:59:52] Voice 3: They were growing in research by foundations.

[2:00:17] Voice 3: And then we have to spend about a thousand bucks in the survey, because we're going to need them.

[2:00:42] Voice 8: Thank you, trustees. Any questions

[2:00:47] Voice 3: for the planner or the applicant?

[2:00:49] Voice 3: I don't have questions, but I have any questions.

[2:00:55] Voice 3: I just have a question. I mean, I think meeting or two, you know, we had another development variance permit where we had some, you know,

[2:01:08] Voice 3: we relaxed it from 70 meters to 113.9 meters squared for a florida what you're saying this

[2:01:21] Voice 3: isn't considered uh minor but is that some what what is the obligations on us of you know what

[2:01:31] Voice 3: what makes um what's the difference in minor major or you know yeah

[2:01:39] Voice 1: so um i think i included

[2:01:41] Voice 1: some language, but under the Local Government Act, the variance should be considered minor.

[2:01:49] Voice 1: And so there is some sort of, because we don't have a delegated development variance permit

[2:01:58] Voice 1: applications, it's sort of open to, somewhat open to interpretation. But I mean, I think the fact

[2:02:04] Voice 1: that you're seeking applicants seeking two and a half times more floor area than what is permitted

[2:02:12] Voice 1: under zoning doesn't constitute minor and so that's sort of the that's the staff sort of because

[2:02:21] Voice 1: I mean there's a reason that these these regulations are put in right and so if I if we

[2:02:31] Voice 1: We decide if it can set sort of an expectation that, you know, every property with a similar zoning, et cetera, can have, you know, an increase in massing, et cetera, that goes well beyond what is permitted.

[2:02:52] Voice 3: I can understand that.

[2:02:54] Voice 3: But, I mean, we did two times before and we didn't discuss major or minor.

[2:02:58] Voice 3: Now, 2.5 times?

[2:02:59] Voice 3: You know, so I just find it pretty close.

[2:03:02] Voice 3: that um i

[2:03:04] Voice 1: think this was in the previous application for this and um that was was held

[2:03:08] Voice 1: by the ltc um this was included i can't speak to the application that you're you're talking to um

[2:03:14] Voice 1: but um having reviewed the previous um uh staff report for this particular application there was

[2:03:20] Voice 1: a discussion um on on on minor what is considered minor etc um

[2:03:29] Voice 8: you know being as this minor major

[2:03:33] Voice 8: major deal is uh

[2:03:34] Voice 3: interpretive um I interpret this as as minor and close to one of the capacity

[2:03:43] Voice 3: capacity I'm inclined to approve this application um at this point I'm sure the first new country

[2:03:59] Voice 3: yeah and I mean I did drive down to the site and you know you go by a very large house on

[2:04:06] Voice 3: on the street coming down to that that that's you know i don't know if it's 25 it's darn close to it

[2:04:13] Voice 3: and you go wow and then you know get to your property so um yeah i i think i i somewhat

[2:04:22] Voice 3: remembered your application from last term and puzzling um and i you know i think at this point

[2:04:29] Voice 3: it the building is built um i think it's in keeping with the property it is not there's

[2:04:35] Voice 3: no complaints from the neighbors i think at this point proceeding you know i have i really don't

[2:04:41] Voice 3: have an objection to

[2:04:45] Voice 8: granting

[2:04:46] Voice 3: the application okay let's hear hearing some consensus here would

[2:04:50] Voice 3: someone like to make a motion i move that the salt spring island trust committee approve application

[2:04:55] Voice 3: application ssdbp 2023.15 further discussion not seeing any i'll call a question all those in favor

[2:05:09] Voice 3: the motion carries thank

[2:05:12] Voice 8: you all

[2:05:14] Voice 3: right moving on to 13.3 wolford guarantees road on page 92

[2:05:23] Voice 3: and this is uh platter caproff again okay

[2:05:27] Voice 1: last you'll hear me sorry for today um the application

[2:05:30] Voice 1: before he is for the mercantile located in Fulford.

[2:05:35] Voice 1: The applicant is seeking a variance

[2:05:37] Voice 1: for three existing sea cans within 2.2 meters

[2:05:40] Voice 1: or 7.2 feet of the main building.

[2:05:42] Voice 1: So one of the sea cans will be, is refrigerated, sorry,

[2:05:47] Voice 1: which will help to reduce food and energy waste

[2:05:49] Voice 1: according to the applicant.

[2:05:50] Voice 1: They also stated that the additional storage area

[2:05:53] Voice 1: would help mitigate rising food costs

[2:05:55] Voice 1: as they could purchase in larger quantities.

[2:05:57] Voice 1: In the past there were temporary storage containers where the three CCANs are now sited and they've put sort of footings on them to level them out.

[2:06:09] Voice 1: The applicant is, the applicant is, the application sorry, is proceeding due to stop work order issued by CRD in May 2023.

[2:06:17] Voice 1: The property is zoned commercial 1, zone variation A, so this zone has a zero meter setback from the exterior side lot line and the front lot line.

[2:06:29] Voice 1: However, they require a permit from the Ministry of Transportation Infrastructure for siting within 4.5 meters or 14.8 feet of a highway right of way, and the applicant's owners are aware of this requirement.

[2:06:43] Voice 1: During the notification period, two written submissions were received from neighbors in support of the application, and then two phone calls were received from a couple that didn't want to prevent the application from proceeding, but they just wanted to kind of put it out there that the CCANs are not visually appealing.

[2:07:01] Voice 1: So staff recommended issuance of SSDVP 2023.17 for the following reasons.

[2:07:07] Voice 1: The existing CCANs support the permitted use of the property and do not obstruct ocean views along Fulford Ganges Road.

[2:07:15] Voice 1: C1A zoning allows for buildings and structures to be sited within zero meters of the existing side lot line, exterior side lot line, sorry.

[2:07:22] Voice 1: The CCANs are sited where the previous temporary structures are located, which didn't result in formal complaints submitted to Islands Trust.

[2:07:30] Voice 1: And according to the applicants, they're willing to improve the seacans elevations by hiring a local artisan to paint them with a coastal design.

[2:07:42] Voice 1: The applicants are unable to attend today, so if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

[2:07:48] Voice 3: Hey trustees, any questions?

[2:07:52] Voice 3: Planner Caproff, we always love hearing from you, so don't apologize.

[2:07:59] Voice 3: I think it's a great solution of, you know, painting and, you know, it is a building with a very tight footprint and it certainly is serving that community.

[2:08:11] Voice 3: So I support that. I'm willing to put motion. I move that the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of SSDBP 23.1.

[2:08:20] Voice 3: So moved. Seconded. Further discussion? Not

[2:08:26] Voice 8: seeing any. I'll call the question.

[2:08:28] Voice 8: motion carries thank you that takes us to application um

[2:08:37] Voice 3: section 13.4

[2:08:41] Voice 3: also full for carriages road on page 113 and this is uh planner bucket

[2:08:51] Voice 3: no we did sorry i'm jumping ahead sorry i'm trying to move us along good

[2:08:58] Voice 7: afternoon i have a total of

[2:08:59] Voice 7: three applications before you today starting with the development permit that was considered

[2:09:03] Voice 7: earlier this morning. In front of you now we have a variance request associated with a subdivision

[2:09:07] Voice 7: at 2101 Wolford Ganges Road. The applicant is proposing a three lot subdivision with two lots

[2:09:13] Voice 7: being created along the rural zone and ALR boundary which abuts the proposed agricultural

[2:09:18] Voice 7: zone remainder parcel. The applicant has previously engaged the LTC through an ALC subdivision

[2:09:23] Voice 7: application to permit the shared strata common property access through the agricultural land

[2:09:28] Voice 7: reserve and active farm site. The ALC permitted the proposed shared driveway on November 3rd,

[2:09:33] Voice 7: 2022, and the applicant has now undergone the subdivision process through the Ministry of

[2:09:38] Voice 7: Transportation and Infrastructure. Through the subdivision referral to the Islands Trust,

[2:09:43] Voice 7: staff identified a variance to the Land Use By-law Section 5.11.1, and this restricts a

[2:09:49] Voice 7: single lot from being divided by a public road or common strata property. Through staff review

[2:09:54] Voice 7: review during this variance process, it was also identified that the proposal requires a lot

[2:09:58] Voice 7: frontage waiver and variance to Land Use By-law Section 5.3.1, as the frontage abutting the common

[2:10:04] Voice 7: access route does not meet the by-law and legislative minimum of 10%. If approved, the

[2:10:09] Voice 7: applicant can proceed with fulfilling the other subdivision requirements, and once the subdivision

[2:10:13] Voice 7: is finalized, two additional rural lots would be added to the overall property stock on Salisbury

[2:10:18] Voice 7: Island. After the subdivision, the current zoning would not allow any further subdivision due to the

[2:10:24] Voice 7: resulting parcel sizes so on that note staff recommend approval of the variance permit to

[2:10:29] Voice 7: waive the land use bylaw requirements and a resolution to waive the local government back

[2:10:34] Voice 7: section 512-2 which requires a minimum 10 frontage unless waived by local government

[2:10:39] Voice 7: i understand the applicant is in attendance today and can answer any questions which lgc may have

[2:10:46] Voice 3: hey thank you planner bucket and the applicant is here did you wish to add anything to that no

[2:10:53] Voice 3: don't thank you okay trustees questions for the planner or the applicant i don't have any questions

[2:10:59] Voice 3: i don't have any questions i mean as i remember this from before and i think this is one of the

[2:11:04] Voice 3: said as we have conversations going the ocp just another example where the sports

[2:11:10] Voice 3: only male are in the

[2:11:12] Voice 3: indifferent zoning because of the way the farms are but that's been done

[2:11:20] Voice 3: okay we have a couple of recommendations of course someone prepared to make a motion

[2:11:26] Voice 3: please i think that the social trust committee approves no invariance permit ss dbp 2023 9.

[2:11:35] Voice 3: so moved seconded uh any further discussion call the question all in favor motion carries

[2:11:43] Voice 3: and second recommendation and that soul span local trust committee with reference to section

[2:11:49] Voice 3: 5122 of the local government act approved frontage relief would require 10 percent 3.74

[2:11:55] Voice 3: four percent for straddle on one seven point six six percent proposed straddle on two as shown on

[2:12:02] Voice 3: the plan subdivision three units seconded any further discussion about the question all in favor

[2:12:14] Voice 3: and that motion carries you so that brings us to 13.6 on page 159 this is also coming to us from

[2:12:24] Voice 3: planner bucket please proceed sir okay

[2:12:27] Voice 7: i'll try and keep this one brief but there's a bit of policy

[2:12:29] Voice 7: involves. So my last application today is for a temporary use permit request to operate a dog

[2:12:33] Voice 7: kennel with an associated seasonal campground and for the allowance of three staff housing RV units.

[2:12:40] Voice 7: The request initially was just for the campground. However, the scope was changed in August and again

[2:12:44] Voice 7: in September to include the additional uses. The applicant previously operated the kennel

[2:12:50] Voice 7: business on Salt Spring Island within a property of suitable zoning. However, personal circumstances

[2:12:54] Voice 7: push the applicant to relocate the operation within a short period of time. The property

[2:12:59] Voice 7: in question is located at 130 Blackburn Road, and it is within the Watershed and Islet Residential

[2:13:05] Voice 7: OCP designation and Watershed 1 zoning. The nature of this zoning is very restrictive to

[2:13:10] Voice 7: any development further than a dwelling unit and agriculture. This restriction to preserve and

[2:13:16] Voice 7: protect the watershed health for the entire community, and it is reflective in the OCP

[2:13:21] Voice 7: policy which states that properties under this designation should have no further development

[2:13:25] Voice 7: other than what is explicitly permitted under current zoning. So notably the property is

[2:13:31] Voice 7: located in an area of especially high aquatic intrinsic vulnerability as detailed in the staff

[2:13:36] Voice 7: report making the contamination potential from this land use significant. Staff have recommended

[2:13:42] Voice 7: denial purely based on OCP non-compliance and have informed the applicant of this recommendation

[2:13:47] Voice 7: outcome since before the application was submitted. Primarily, this is due to the OCP

[2:13:52] Voice 7: Part G policy, which is around temporary use permits and establishes that watershed and

[2:13:58] Voice 7: islet residential designated properties are simply not eligible for the issuance of a temporary use

[2:14:03] Voice 7: permit. This ineligibility for issuance is the reason a permit is not drafted in before you

[2:14:09] Voice 7: today. Proving the temporary use permit, which is clearly against OCP policy on eligibility,

[2:14:14] Voice 7: is legally challengeable, as the LTC should not be making decisions contrary to our OCP policy.

[2:14:20] Voice 7: In addition, under Part G, temporary use policy states that properties with suitable zoning for

[2:14:26] Voice 7: the requested use must not be available. However, properties for penal uses, including properties

[2:14:32] Voice 7: with rural zoning and rural uplands one zoning, are common and present throughout the island.

[2:14:39] Voice 7: Secondary to this reasoning, the majority of OCP policy under the watershed designation

[2:14:42] Voice 7: designation is not met due to the nature of restricting any further development other than

[2:14:47] Voice 7: the current zoning. This extends to restrictions on housing where no secondary suites or cottages

[2:14:52] Voice 7: are permitted. And additionally, OCP policy suggests that campgrounds should not be permitted

[2:14:57] Voice 7: in the watershed zone. Notifications to the property owner were sent on multiple occasions

[2:15:03] Voice 7: regarding today's meeting and the staff recommendation for denial. However, staff

[2:15:08] Voice 7: have not heard back. Further requests from staff on servicing information and reports addressing

[2:15:14] Voice 7: the development's impact to the watershed have not been submitted by the applicant.

[2:15:18] Voice 7: As I'm unsure if the applicant is with us today, I'm happy to answer any questions that LTC may

[2:15:23] Voice 7: have. Thanks.

[2:15:25] Voice 3: And I don't believe we have an applicant in the room today,

[2:15:29] Voice 3: so any questions for the planner? Did you say the initial application was for a campground?

[2:15:35] Voice 3: Oh,

[2:15:36] Voice 7: I may have misspoken. I'm sorry. For a dog kennel and then the additional uses afterward for a campground and staff housing.

[2:15:42] Voice 7: Sorry if I misspoke.

[2:15:43] Voice 4: No, that's all right. That's why I was trying to clarify.

[2:15:47] Voice 7: Understood.

[2:15:48] Voice 3: How's the patient?

[2:15:49] Voice 8: Oh, sorry.

[2:15:50] Voice 8: 159.

[2:15:51] Voice 8: 159.

[2:15:56] Voice 8: Anything further?

[2:15:57] Voice 8: I have, as Planner Bakken heard from the Ministry of Transportation, I had

[2:16:05] Voice 3: heard something from them, I had spoken with one of the managers, so can you speak to that?

[2:16:12] Voice 7: I did have a conversation with Modi. The access off of, what's the road? Not Blackburn.

[2:16:20] Voice 7: and Ganges, I

[2:16:22] Voice 7: believe, is not permitted.

[2:16:24] Voice 7: So I believe the applicant closed it

[2:16:26] Voice 7: by pointing out the chain link fence.

[2:16:28] Voice 7: I don't know what the status is right now,

[2:16:30] Voice 7: but a letter was sent to the applicant from MOTI

[2:16:32] Voice 7: and subsequent actions were taken to close it.

[2:16:40] Voice 8: Anything further, Trustee?

[2:16:42] Voice 3: The access is a big issue for me.

[2:16:46] Voice 3: When I spoke to MOTI,

[2:16:48] Voice 3: that access was supposed to be removed.

[2:16:51] Voice 3: I'll put it back to its original state.

[2:16:56] Voice 3: so yeah you

[2:16:58] Voice 3: know it's very dangerous that access not to mention they even see it so i'm in support

[2:17:06] Voice 3: of this recommendation at this point okay um go ahead and make the motion then this looks like

[2:17:17] Voice 3: it's all one so it's not very nice to say i'm it's i i always keep going back to the wild cider

[2:17:26] Voice 3: method anyway of you know being a good neighbor and working with neighbors and you know this this

[2:17:33] Voice 3: case was just it showed up if neighbors weren't even given an opportunity um never mind the

[2:17:42] Voice 3: issues that were raised by them but yeah so yeah i'm

[2:17:47] Voice 3: in support i know that certainly i've seen

[2:17:50] Voice 3: of the human emails um this is nine letters uh yeah number of emails expressing concerns from

[2:17:58] Voice 3: neighbors so the access to me is just a huge importance that he was an e-corporate around

[2:18:03] Voice 3: the sight lines thought that distance i first can see people pulling out there

[2:18:09] Voice 3: is that the one where when we went up to um maxwell that came down he pointed out to me okay

[2:18:15] Voice 3: that's the one and it's been made known that something needs to be done about the access

[2:18:19] Voice 3: say putting a chain link is not something you've done that science put up with the science you're

[2:18:25] Voice 3: on people are pulling in and out of there but i think certain games so on but then the teams

[2:18:32] Voice 3: needs to agree that um all right

[2:18:36] Voice 11: would someone like to move the recommendations we'll start

[2:18:39] Voice 3: i'll move that the salisbury island local trust committee deny issuance of temporary use permit

[2:18:42] Voice 3: SSTP 2023.1 and

[2:18:47] Voice 3: direct staff to close application SSTP 2023.1 for the following reasons.

[2:18:53] Voice 3: Salt Spring OCP bylaw number 434 does not list the watershed pilot residential designation as

[2:19:02] Voice 3: eligible for temporary use permit. The watershed policy under section V8, Salt Spring Island OCP

[2:19:10] Voice 3: p number four three four restricts any further development than what is committed by current

[2:19:15] Voice 3: zoning and see there are a number of

[2:19:19] Voice 3: appropriately zoned properties located on salt spring island

[2:19:22] Voice 3: which are suitable for the proposed can use so moved seconded any further discussion i would

[2:19:31] Voice 3: just like to mention if i may it would be nice as the applicant have been here because possibly

[2:19:37] Voice 3: and what was okay anything further in that case i'll call the question all in favor

[2:19:47] Voice 3: and that carries so that concludes the application section then thank you everyone

[2:20:01] Voice 3: and this brings us to section um 14 we have the official training plan

[2:20:09] Voice 3: and use village planning up first and

[2:20:13] Voice 8: staff report on page 180 and let her garble that thank you

[2:20:31] Voice 2: chair uh and good afternoon trustees and can you see the powerpoint in front of you yes okay

[2:20:40] Voice 2: awesome thank you uh so the staff report uh before you today is uh in part in response to the um

[2:20:49] Voice 2: LTC's request to provide a roadmap on the projects, and also the scope of services.

[2:21:00] Voice 2: So, the slide before you shows the roadmap, kind of guiding the projects that are in the

[2:21:11] Voice 2: Local Trust Committee's work program. And the first one is the data collections and analysis,

[2:21:17] Voice 2: starting as soon as possible, and followed by the OCP and the land use bylaw prep work,

[2:21:28] Voice 2: and then subsequently will be the Ganges area plan.

[2:21:34] Voice 2: And throughout this process, ongoing engagement is the critical component,

[2:21:41] Voice 2: and it will continue up until the life of the projects.

[2:21:45] Voice 2: The reason why the data collections and analysis require immediate action is because of the grants that we received.

[2:21:58] Voice 2: It was a grant issued by the Ministry of Housing and administered by the Union of BC Municipalities.

[2:22:09] Voice 2: And it not only allows us to procure the consultant to do data collection and analysis, the consultant will do geospatial mapping and also do complete community growth modeling, provide some scenarios, and make recommendations.

[2:22:28] Voice 2: recommendations. And the other two projects, as trustees recall, LTC recall that LTC approved

[2:22:38] Voice 2: the business case for the budget, upcoming budget to consider to support the two projects.

[2:22:46] Voice 2: So this particular report focuses on the first immediate action that we need to take because we

[2:22:54] Voice 2: We need to respond to the grant application, sorry, grant deadline.

[2:23:00] Voice 2: And the grant is called a complete community grant.

[2:23:04] Voice 2: The intent is to support local communities to develop evidence-based analysis.

[2:23:11] Voice 2: And there are criteria with the grant because we are the recipient of the grant.

[2:23:18] Voice 2: So we need to comply with the criteria.

[2:23:20] Voice 2: And basically, it's to do analysis under the four lenses, which include the housing, transportation, daily needs, which the ministry defined it as public amenities and public services, and infrastructure.

[2:23:35] Voice 2: And we were notified of the successful application in late September for $150,000 for the grant.

[2:23:47] Voice 2: And the conditions requires that we need to complete our work by September of next year.

[2:23:55] Voice 2: And also, LTC requested to look at the RFP.

[2:24:01] Voice 2: Now the RFP, the request for proposal itself is a 25 pages documents. It's all template from the ministry that talks about the contractual obligations. But the scope of services is the key thing. And so we presented the scope of services for LTC to consider.

[2:24:21] Voice 2: And within there, it provides the project objectives and the consultant's responsibilities and the task to be undertaking and also the progress reports and deliverables.

[2:24:37] Voice 2: And the scope of services, it's attached to the staff report.

[2:24:42] Voice 2: And here, it's just kind of provide the highlight of the scope of services requested within the RFP.

[2:24:52] Voice 2: And the main task is really for the consultant to conduct an equity-based community engagement program.

[2:25:01] Voice 2: Again, more details is in the attachment, data collections and analysis, data assessment, and also report and recommendations.

[2:25:11] Voice 2: And as I mentioned before, the request is to ask them to provide some growth scenarios and also make recommendations.

[2:25:19] Voice 2: recommendations. And to focus a little bit on the engagement program per LTC, we make sure that it

[2:25:28] Voice 2: is an equity-based engagement program, and it's to be consistent with the IPA2's diversity, equity,

[2:25:38] Voice 2: and inclusion principles. And the consultant will also be responsible to provide a comprehensive

[2:25:46] Voice 2: intensive public engagement, early engagement with First Nations communities, as well as

[2:25:54] Voice 2: coordination with ministries, agencies, and local organizations. Before the consultant

[2:26:02] Voice 2: launch any public engagement program, they will bring the proposal to LTC for consideration.

[2:26:12] Voice 2: So with that, staff proposed two motions for LTC to allow us to move forward with the request

[2:26:23] Voice 2: for a proposal.

[2:26:25] Voice 2: I'm happy to answer any questions.

[2:26:28] Voice 3: Thank you, Leonard Garbo.

[2:26:30] Voice 3: Any questions?

[2:26:31] Voice 2: I do.

[2:26:33] Voice 3: Just Patrick.

[2:26:36] Voice 3: Thank you.

[2:26:40] Voice 3: But I do have some questions and some concerns, but I also have some suggestions to overcome my concerns.

[2:26:52] Voice 3: I find the guidance material for Complete Communities quite helpful.

[2:26:56] Voice 3: In particular, what's it called? It's referenced in your report.

[2:27:05] Voice 3: sorry, what's the name of it?

[2:27:07] Voice 3: It's the, what is the name of it?

[2:27:11] Voice 3: Sorry, I'm just trying to think.

[2:27:13] Voice 3: Complete Communities, a Guide to Geospatial Land Use

[2:27:16] Voice 3: Assessments for British Columbia Communities.

[2:27:18] Voice 3: So I find that guide excellent and easy to understand

[2:27:23] Voice 3: and get our ways through it.

[2:27:25] Voice 3: You know, it provides questions like study area,

[2:27:28] Voice 3: what are we studying and who we are

[2:27:30] Voice 3: in those communities, A, B, and C.

[2:27:33] Voice 3: And I think we're clearly community C. Community C is opting to assess its entire footprint within its boundaries.

[2:27:41] Voice 3: They are considering an upcoming official community plan review and are incorporating the findings of their housing needs report.

[2:27:48] Voice 3: The assessment will be a key technical input and conversation starter for both official community plan and potential housing strategy,

[2:27:55] Voice 3: particularly on the topic of encouraging housing to address their current and anticipated housing needs.

[2:28:01] Voice 3: needs. So I think that's us. We're community C under this guide. And it also describes

[2:28:09] Voice 3: different types of rural communities. And I think we're an outer developed rural community

[2:28:14] Voice 3: from which people travel to develop rural cores for services, shopping, school, or recreation.

[2:28:20] Voice 3: And it's important to consider the connectivity between outer developed rural communities

[2:28:25] Voice 3: and developed rural cores. The one thing that is unique, and I think we've got to keep stressing

[2:28:30] Voice 3: and I would assume a consultant would figure it out

[2:28:33] Voice 3: pretty darn quick is that we are an island complete

[2:28:36] Voice 3: community or an island, a nearly complete community.

[2:28:40] Voice 3: And we do still have relationships between, you know,

[2:28:43] Voice 3: where our touch points are as we bury leaves

[2:28:46] Voice 3: and goes to the other side, you know,

[2:28:47] Voice 3: people do need to leave the island for reasons too,

[2:28:50] Voice 3: to make this be.

[2:28:51] Voice 3: So we're a nearly complete community.

[2:28:55] Voice 3: In our application to the province,

[2:28:58] Voice 3: we indicated and we identified a number of partner agencies and organizations that would

[2:29:05] Voice 3: be involved, but most of them have not been talked to and involved in planning this, and

[2:29:15] Voice 3: I think having that island component to this is critical for success.

[2:29:24] Voice 3: This is really about kicking off the OCP in a very good way and putting us on a good path to be clear, focused, and hopefully as quick as we can be when we get into the OCP.

[2:29:42] Voice 3: So if we don't do a good job at this stage, it's not going to get any better as we go into the OCP.

[2:29:48] Voice 3: So I would be recommending that, you know, that the terms of reference be just revised a bit to...

[2:30:00] Voice 3: do sort of a phase one phase two approach phase one being the you know kind of steps one and two

[2:30:06] Voice 3: from the guidance material which is the you know the the the objectives of the goals and the uh

[2:30:13] Voice 3: scoping and that phase one be done in you know in collaboration with the partners i mean you can get

[2:30:21] Voice 3: the consultant the consultant would work with the partners to then you know develop what the

[2:30:28] Voice 3: work plan and is for the final steps of the of the work and that there be a deliverable of that

[2:30:37] Voice 3: after that step one step two or that phase one point that comes back to the local trust committee

[2:30:43] Voice 3: so we can see where they're going and that we have a chance to kind of have an idea of

[2:30:48] Voice 3: what what was the outcome of that review or the scoping exercise and so that we have a touch

[2:30:57] Voice 3: point before they go off and do the next point. The reason why I recommend this is the price is

[2:31:03] Voice 3: fixed. This isn't like a surprise that a consultant is going to bid on being cheaper. The price is

[2:31:09] Voice 3: fixed. It's public. They know what the amount is. So I think you're looking for a good, strong

[2:31:16] Voice 3: consultant that understands that they're going to be on an island. They've got some experience

[2:31:21] Voice 3: and doing this, and that they've got the skill set for, you know, complete communities, which is quite well defined in the guidance material.

[2:31:32] Voice 3: So that's, I think, important to me, and that's my only recommendation is to do some, to direct you to do some modifications is where I'm leaning.

[2:31:42] Voice 3: So happy to hear other thoughts.

[2:31:48] Voice 8: Modifications is a good word.

[2:31:50] Voice 8: to just see yeah it sounds like we make things more complicated than they need to be

[2:32:08] Voice 8: i'm not saying that but marvel was purposely training but i'm not really

[2:32:25] Voice 8: yeah

[2:32:28] Voice 3: i think what i'm recommending is this will give us a chance to see that first

[2:32:31] Voice 3: they come and they scope it and come back to us before they go do the work so that we don't get

[2:32:36] Voice 3: the end of the day for the project we go what the is this so that we get a chance to to see it and

[2:32:42] Voice 3: and have a touch point before we get into the next part

[2:32:46] Voice 3: of doing the detailed analysis

[2:32:48] Voice 3: and how that's gonna work, what that could look like.

[2:32:53] Voice 3: Mr. Chair, I really appreciate this direction.

[2:32:58] Voice 3: It seems to me that a big part of this

[2:33:00] Voice 3: is the gathering of data

[2:33:02] Voice 3: and the synthesizing data from many sources,

[2:33:08] Voice 3: all of which is very, very boring, frankly,

[2:33:11] Voice 3: from a public engagement perspective um but very interesting to um people like myself that

[2:33:17] Voice 3: work with government and various service agencies that contain this data so um i think it's really

[2:33:23] Voice 3: reasonable for us to we can also do this as more of a technical process at the beginning where we're

[2:33:28] Voice 3: bringing this stuff together with all these organizations and using that data appropriately

[2:33:35] Voice 3: um that's that's work that we can do with um with groups and with other governance agencies

[2:33:40] Voice 3: entities that that would be providing that information um and then it certainly reasonable

[2:33:46] Voice 3: to come back and do a touch point with uh ltc to confirm the direction we're on because presumably

[2:33:51] Voice 3: the next step would be to actually go to the public um and impersonate anyone else to talk

[2:33:56] Voice 3: about what what this means that we're finding um so that that part obviously we wouldn't want to

[2:34:02] Voice 3: go out with that anyways without talking to lpc first um without presenting that question to you

[2:34:09] Voice 3: you all. So I think it's it's it's something that we can

[2:34:13] Voice 3: pivot pretty easily with. In this term, we can take that

[2:34:16] Voice 3: away as direction to just tighten this up a bit.

[2:34:22] Voice 3: Mr. Chair,

[2:34:23] Voice 8: yes, sir. My other comment would be about the OCP

[2:34:28] Voice 8: project. I realize this is going to take some serious, it needs

[2:34:36] Voice 8: to be updated. Really hoping that we can amend existing

[2:34:40] Voice 3: existing as prior. I know we can do it as we actually want. We can amend the existing, but clearly this

[2:34:51] Voice 8: is part of the OCP board. We want to get it right. So I'll

[2:35:04] Voice 3: leave it at that.

[2:35:05] Voice 3: Well, I agree with you, Trustee Harris, very much. When I look at, to stay with the roadmap analogy here, there always should be off ramps as the project, you know, gets going.

[2:35:18] Voice 3: if if this community grant is done properly with this phased approach in the beginning and you know

[2:35:25] Voice 3: people are all brought together and you know we're we have a higher likelihood of something

[2:35:31] Voice 3: becomes clear this just needs to be done do this there'll be an improvement now um you know so

[2:35:37] Voice 3: that that's what i would hope would would come out of a process like this so there should always be

[2:35:43] Voice 3: an off-ramp to the roadway here that says no this is a great package go take this you know do this

[2:35:50] Voice 3: now and that's going to bring immediate relief i think you know there's no one that's going to

[2:35:56] Voice 3: come sit down in this organ you know a consultant that can do work of this nature will only see

[2:36:03] Voice 3: opportunities which relief will happen i don't know well i'm just saying i'm being open to

[2:36:10] Voice 3: if someone looking at all of our choices of where we could could you know encourage housing to

[2:36:18] Voice 3: address our current and anticipated needs maybe something will become clearer than

[2:36:24] Voice 3: earlier on in the process there should be off ramps that you can proceed take a good

[2:36:32] Voice 3: initiative and start moving it into action or referring to amending the existing ocp

[2:36:42] Voice 3: particularly proportions of the housing section prior to the approach possibly that's what i'm

[2:36:50] Voice 3: saying leave that door open or possibly in conjunction with this there's a few ways that

[2:36:57] Voice 3: that can occur i think we can take a strategic approach um to recognize that if there's there's

[2:37:03] Voice 3: traction especially if there's easy ways to do right away yes it's reasonable and our

[2:37:07] Voice 3: Our structure within the Island Trust Policy 6.21 that sets out sort of our minor and major projects would enable us to possibly do a side project if that was something that revealed itself.

[2:37:19] Voice 3: If it was within sort of the minor project threshold for that sort of $105,000 endeavor and a substantial plan,

[2:37:29] Voice 11: It

[2:37:29] Voice 3: might be just cleaning that off to another planning team or for someone else to undertake this small amendment to get some quick wins.

[2:37:41] Voice 3: This is sort of veering into the strategic planning world, but as we sort of dig into these issues,

[2:37:47] Voice 3: the benefit of digging into these kind of issues is that you find things that are kind of the real problem

[2:37:54] Voice 3: problem and find out the big glaring issues that are um rapid wins we can we can certainly build

[2:38:02] Voice 3: that into the process once you have a consultant working on a project like this um not only are

[2:38:09] Voice 3: they finding problems in the policy but they're also finding um they're usually subject matter

[2:38:13] Voice 3: experts and very connected with community and finding things like um finding opportunities

[2:38:17] Voice 3: or other opportunities to help us move more quickly.

[2:38:24] Voice 8: In terms of what you brought

[2:38:28] Voice 3: up there at first,

[2:38:31] Voice 3: Trustee Patrick and the partners and such, was there anything that needed to be made explicit?

[2:38:42] Voice 8: Well,

[2:38:42] Voice 3: yes, I didn't propose any language at this point because I want to be able to have an open conversation on this.

[2:38:53] Voice 3: So looking at your recommendation two, I think it proceeds with a phased approach or something of that nature as discussed, or a phased approach as discussed.

[2:39:11] Voice 3: I don't know what level of detail.

[2:39:14] Voice 3: I want to make sure I'm comfortable that this happens.

[2:39:16] Voice 3: And do we need to specifically say and engage the partners that we've identified already in that part?

[2:39:24] Voice 3: I mean, I don't want them to fall off the table.

[2:39:28] Voice 3: Would it be a suggestion that we focus on the technical engagement first with community partners,

[2:39:40] Voice 3: prioritizing that in terms of a scoping exercise?

[2:39:49] Voice 3: Yeah, I'd rather say a scoping than a technical engagement, just because it

[2:39:54] Voice 8: sounds so dry.

[2:40:00] Voice 3: To do a phased approach with the first phase, including a, let me just say, scoping involving

[2:40:14] Voice 3: involving

[2:40:15] Voice 3: partners

[2:40:16] Voice 3: and you've already

[2:40:20] Voice 3: identified the partner in the application

[2:40:21] Voice 3: something like that

[2:40:28] Voice 3: and then a phased

[2:40:30] Voice 3: approach because you're getting

[2:40:32] Voice 3: one

[2:40:35] Voice 3: contract

[2:40:35] Voice 3: one call for a proposal

[2:40:38] Voice 3: to lay that out

[2:40:42] Voice 3: okay

[2:40:44] Voice 8: on that language there

[2:40:52] Voice 3: Chair,

[2:40:54] Voice 2: just for some clarity, next month staff intend to bring back the, bring in the terms of reference for the project.

[2:41:04] Voice 2: And that will identify all the different phases of the public engagement and collaboration with technical working group

[2:41:14] Voice 2: that's consisting of all the ministry staff and agencies

[2:41:18] Voice 2: and also the dialogue with First Nations.

[2:41:22] Voice 2: And this contract, the engagement portion is,

[2:41:28] Voice 2: as I mentioned, is early dialogue

[2:41:31] Voice 2: as reference to the guideline

[2:41:33] Voice 2: that talks about early engagement,

[2:41:35] Voice 2: asking the community what did they see,

[2:41:38] Voice 2: consider it as a complete community,

[2:41:40] Voice 2: that level of conversation.

[2:41:43] Voice 2: That's why we have the roadmap have that long arrow showing the entire process will have continuous engagement, and likely even involve different consultant, specifically to conduct engagement on the OCP policies for clarification.

[2:42:02] Voice 2: So this is

[2:42:03] Voice 2: not the only engagement effort.

[2:42:06] Voice 2: No,

[2:42:07] Voice 3: no, no, I hear you on that I'm responding to the terms of reference. I mean,

[2:42:10] Voice 3: I mean, I'll be frank.

[2:42:13] Voice 3: I mean, I was in consulting for a long time responding to RFPs.

[2:42:18] Voice 3: I mean, that's how you're bread and butter.

[2:42:19] Voice 3: You get an RFP and you prepare a response to it.

[2:42:23] Voice 3: I look at this and I'm confused.

[2:42:28] Voice 3: And I'm not getting the clarity of what I'm being asked to do.

[2:42:34] Voice 3: And that's why I think, you know, the scoping involved the consulting and the scoping and involved partners that you've already identified in the application to do that scoping.

[2:42:49] Voice 3: And then do a check-in with the local trust committee when it's scoped so that we're all on board, that we're all heading down the right track.

[2:43:00] Voice 3: um so that that's the only you know it's gone too too far down into the weeds already without

[2:43:13] Voice 3: doing that scoping exercise so it's about really setting the project on a strong beginning

[2:43:19] Voice 3: um and i you know i see the value of all you know all the all the partners and the partner

[2:43:26] Voice 3: is about that fan out of getting people brought into the program they'll be assisting in the

[2:43:32] Voice 3: public engagement in so many ways by you know if the partners are involved they're already

[2:43:37] Voice 3: talking it up with the people they're dealing with and you know it's it's just a way of getting

[2:43:42] Voice 3: everybody going along and if the partners are brought in and agree and kind of the next phase

[2:43:48] Voice 3: is the scope as well then everybody's kind of moving along you don't have that objection

[2:43:53] Voice 3: To maybe go back to the roadmap process, I think maybe the disconnect here is that if

[2:44:02] Voice 3: I take what LPC has suggested earlier on, there needs to be a focus on the technical

[2:44:11] Voice 3: and the funding department, so it's the sources of data, and really what the trigger point

[2:44:19] Voice 3: for starting the OCP-LUB process and that the continuation of the community to bring back the

[2:44:24] Voice 3: it was maybe to bring back the roadmap um on three um but that you can see that overlap there

[2:44:31] Voice 3: so it seems to me that prior to getting to that point of starting the OCP-LUB process

[2:44:38] Voice 3: we're going to be through that scoping process and we're going to reveal

[2:44:43] Voice 3: um some some key findings and start up a work of engaging on that um that's that's the point

[2:44:49] Voice 3: to which we really start the public engagement process what's what's not in here and i don't

[2:44:54] Voice 3: i don't think it was intended the roadmap wasn't intended to show you single-based projects

[2:44:58] Voice 3: so so this two-page approach is something we can work with and we can integrate into the roadmap

[2:45:10] Voice 3: very easily um and then the trigger point may evolve somewhat in terms of where that starts and

[2:45:20] Voice 3: i'm looking at the guidance material for doing the green box of your roadmap which is the complete

[2:45:26] Voice 3: community grants now it starts with step one understand the community goals you know what

[2:45:31] Voice 3: of that clarity step two scoping step three is now opening the public again it's laid out right

[2:45:39] I

[2:45:39] Voice 3: hear it's beautifully written, including describing our community quite well.

[2:45:46] Voice 3: And so I see, you know, these steps of, you know, that's the phase one I'm talking about is step one and two is described in the very, the guidance document here.

[2:46:01] Voice 3: here. And then before you go out into the public engagement

[2:46:06] Voice 3: process, it's a check back in with us to say, did you get the

[2:46:10] Voice 3: goals and the scoping? Like, you know, we're all we're all

[2:46:16] Voice 3: together. So then, then it's you're still in the green bar.

[2:46:21] Voice 2: Yeah, I think I got it. I got it. Thank you.

[2:46:25] Voice 3: It's laid out in this guide.

[2:46:33] Voice 3: about because we were sort of working towards amendment on the second uh

[2:46:37] Voice 11: request staff to make

[2:46:39] Voice 11: modifications to the scope to have a phased approach and add regular check-ins with the ltc

[2:46:44] Voice 11: prior to the public engagement process let's

[2:46:48] Voice 3: say if um yeah i would have it's i there should be

[2:46:53] Voice 3: like a deliverable to the um so after the uh early the phase one of uh you know kind of goals and um

[2:47:06] Voice 3: scoping there actually should be a deliverable to

[2:47:11] Voice 8: for the for the delivery of the rest of the

[2:47:15] Voice 8: project should come to us with here's the

[2:47:25] Voice 3: plan this is how we're going to make the $150,000

[2:47:31] Voice 3: work

[2:47:32] Voice 8: it's all the other steps so let's do a phased approach and do uh what

[2:47:51] Voice 3: would be a looking

[2:47:52] Voice 3: i don't want to use words that are unfamiliar to staff so that's

[2:47:56] Voice 3: what um what would be there's a

[2:47:59] Voice 3: deliverable of some form that comes to us uh sort of work well it might be it's in the comparative

[2:48:06] Voice 3: scope um that

[2:48:09] Voice 8: scope is probably more complicated than the project planning plan

[2:48:25] Voice 3: plan. Yeah. So yeah, first engagement step will be coming

[2:48:31] Voice 11: to us and

[2:48:32] Voice 3: getting thumbs up from us and saying, Yeah, you got it.

[2:48:36] Voice 3: They were going to call you.

[2:48:48] Voice 3: I would just say through instead as described through through a phased approach to the scope

[2:49:03] Voice 3: of services based approach to the scope of services partners i would say at least they

[2:49:14] Voice 3: identified partners because it's it's already they've identified them um and add a deliverable

[2:49:25] Voice 8: to the look

[2:49:26] Voice 3: but oh

[2:49:27] Voice 8: yeah uh confirming the scope for uh ltc group okay um

[2:49:37] Voice 3: We

[2:49:38] Voice 8: get a little shut out.

[2:49:39] Voice 3: I'm sorry. I don't have

[2:49:41] Voice 3: it on the screen now when we we also have recommendation one. We have two yet. That's that's a motion. Yeah, that's just the road map. Do you want to go on or go back and debate?

[2:49:51] Voice 3: Well, I'm happy to see this as you wish, but a motion compared let's let's have it.

[2:50:03] Voice 3: i mean the road map as we talked about the only other thing we want to know is if there are any

[2:50:07] Voice 3: you know leaving opportunities for early wins early easy wins

[2:50:15] Voice 3: i think no matter what we do here if i may that we'll still be able to amend it

[2:50:23] Voice 3: if we choose we can easily amend

[2:50:27] Voice 8: the existing i

[2:50:30] Voice 3: don't see that part of me i just a lot of this

[2:50:34] Voice 3: seems seems overly complicated to me um i know many people in the community we're not even going

[2:50:42] Voice 3: to pay any attention to this um you know the community engagement that's like we know that

[2:50:48] Voice 3: who comes to the engagements who's there saying people all the time the people don't aren't

[2:50:55] Voice 3: involved seven thousand people didn't even vote so but we do know we've got some major issues here

[2:51:01] Voice 3: One of them, the main one being, is what we're challenging change.

[2:51:07] So, you know, this is great.

[2:51:09] Nobody's really, you know, there's a few people paying attention.

[2:51:12] Do this, we should get it right.

[2:51:13] But I don't think it's going to impede us

[2:51:15] Voice 3: from doing some things that people will notice

[2:51:18] Voice 3: and will hear about and will care about in the short term.

[2:51:22] Voice 3: So.

[2:51:26] Voice 3: I agree with you, Trustee Harris, and that's one of the reasons why we brought that equity

[2:51:32] Voice 3: engagement because that that forces um the program to look at who's missing and to make

[2:51:41] Voice 3: sure that they're being brought in one way or another to um conversations so that we aren't just

[2:51:46] Voice 3: listening one voice that we are if i may it may not even be that it's one voice or two sides or

[2:51:56] Voice 3: anything it's just a small voice on both sides most people just straight over their heads are

[2:52:01] Voice 3: to be trying to make ends meet and get by and worried about if they're going to move or not

[2:52:06] Voice 3: because there's nowhere to live and they're leaving it up to us to do something about it

[2:52:13] Voice 3: but do you want to do do you want to modify that first one saying we you know we accept the road

[2:52:20] Voice 3: map to the three major identified projects recognizing uh i'm

[2:52:27] Voice 11: happy to modify this easy

[2:52:28] Voice 3: Easy, easy, easy, easy, easy, easy.

[2:52:33] Voice 3: Well, again, I'm hoping we can just go ahead with some easy wins without having, right?

[2:52:38] Voice 5: I

[2:52:39] Voice 3: know, I know.

[2:52:39] Voice 3: I just want to make sure we've left ourselves, we're being clear to everyone that we still

[2:52:46] Voice 3: hope that there could be, I don't know, easy wins is the right word.

[2:52:53] Voice 3: Yeah.

[2:52:54] Voice 3: Yeah, I just maybe look to staff because I heard Mr. Hutton, I believe, saying that as we identify any of those along the way that there's what we're contemplating right in front of us right now is not going to impede necessarily those so-called easy wins that we do along the way.

[2:53:23] Voice 3: Yeah, we can explore that as we go. I think there's enough flexibility in it and that, you know, provided that LTC is adequately informed, which is a big part of these projects involving many touch points with LTC.

[2:53:36] Voice 3: It requires the championship. Any of these projects are going to require the championship of LTC to succeed.

[2:53:42] Voice 3: succeed, so you definitely need to come along for the ride.

[2:53:48] Voice 3: So as we're observing findings, those wins

[2:53:53] Voice 3: may be observed by the project team,

[2:53:56] Voice 3: certainly with the leadership that understanding

[2:54:00] Voice 3: that you're seeing opportunities in the community

[2:54:02] Voice 3: and it's coming together.

[2:54:04] Voice 3: But there's no need to direct that.

[2:54:06] Voice 3: I don't think it's pretty much part

[2:54:10] Voice 3: of the course for a project of this size

[2:54:13] Voice 3: have these touch points and we can certainly work brain findings that way yeah that i mean that said

[2:54:21] Voice 3: uh uh professor patrick if you want to include some language i'm happy to hear it but uh okay

[2:54:28] Voice 3: i just hope you know even when you're going out to look for so there's some messaging that you know

[2:54:32] Voice 3: helps a consultant to know that that's something they should have in there that they're looking

[2:54:38] Voice 3: get out to work because it incentivizes them to be working for us and the idea as well

[2:54:44] Voice 3: that something becomes clear that we're we're open if you want to hear it you see something

[2:54:51] Voice 3: this will make a difference if you do this now um so it's keeping that freedom in place so

[2:55:00] Voice 3: i'm i'm okay i'll take your word that these uh off ramps are going to be uh installed on the

[2:55:07] Voice 3: bridges or this highway accessible if i may mr chair i think that we'll be able to install the

[2:55:13] Voice 3: off ramps if we still choose and we say this is what we want to do there's a strategy to that

[2:55:20] Voice 3: how you use you know we have an annual budget for minor projects um and that's probably what what's

[2:55:27] Voice 3: required that our staff are available and that we're able to access the nine projects budget to

[2:55:34] Voice 3: to do this quickly.

[2:55:35] Voice 3: That's really what minor projects are for, is good things.

[2:55:40] Voice 3: Yeah, and the timing, this will work well with that

[2:55:43] Voice 3: because it's gonna, this has to be done by August.

[2:55:45] Voice 3: Yeah.

[2:55:46] Voice 3: So the consulting piece,

[2:55:48] Voice 3: so that's right into our budget process.

[2:55:50] Voice 3: You know, we talk about consultants say,

[2:55:52] Voice 3: I almost just said consultants in the past

[2:55:54] Voice 3: show that people, of course, ownership housing,

[2:55:57] Voice 3: other jurisdictions have examples of ownership housing

[2:56:07] Voice 3: projects that housing authority

[2:56:10] Voice 3: what do you think to do to facilitate these so when i hear consultants i know we brought

[2:56:19] Voice 3: consultants but hey um yeah um i agree so well i think the advantage in this case is especially

[2:56:27] Voice 3: isn't it because uh we know that we have limited capacity within our own staff

[2:56:33] Voice 3: we've been given the grant to pay for it which is fabulous and uh and in in many ways the fact that

[2:56:41] Voice 3: there's a deadline um for this work to be done uh associated with the grant that uh

[2:56:48] Voice 3: it means necessarily we'll we'll have this information sooner than we might otherwise

[2:56:54] Voice 3: so well and the whole purpose of this money is about uh encouraging housing that's the whole

[2:56:59] Voice 3: yeah in this program um it's funny because i i just don't think we need more encouragement

[2:57:04] Voice 3: it's a shame we are where we are and uh yeah all right so then we'll i'll make the first

[2:57:13] Voice 3: motion then that the salt spring island trust committee accepts the road map for the three

[2:57:17] Voice 3: major projects identified in the staff report moved i'll let you say i'll second that uh any

[2:57:24] Voice 3: discussion i'm not going to discuss something okay i'll call the question all in favor

[2:57:31] Voice 3: any opposed motion carries next motion the second

[2:57:35] Voice 3: motion we've made some changes that's

[2:57:37] Voice 3: um it's the same i'm with the salzburg island trust committee requests staff to proceed with

[2:57:46] Voice 3: the request proposal process to carry out the tasks and the equity centered public engagement

[2:57:54] Voice 3: program through a phased approach to the scope of services that includes the identified

[2:58:00] Voice 3: identified partners and add a deliverable confirming the scope prior to public engagement

[2:58:06] Voice 3: for the LTC approval so

[2:58:10] Voice 8: moved uh if you don't second that uh discussion okay I'll call the

[2:58:19] Voice 8: question all in

[2:58:19] Voice 3: favor any opposed the motion carries thank

[2:58:27] Voice 2: you and

[2:58:28] Voice 3: is there anything further

[2:58:29] Voice 3: any further we need to do on this today anyone trustee Harris ready to move along hey thank you

[2:58:40] Voice 3: planner Garbo thank

[2:58:41] Voice 2: you okay

[2:58:43] Voice 3: so this brings us to 14.2 on page 191. oh maybe I made a mistake

[2:58:50] Voice 3: so was that just the OCP part but that was the OCP judges Village Club now we're moving on today

[2:58:57] Voice 3: proposed by law 530. okay because i had an omp oh oh so i'm sorry then was there something

[2:59:03] Voice 3: well let's wait i have

[2:59:04] Voice 8: i don't mind

[2:59:04] Voice 3: backing up then please please go ahead uh you've got

[2:59:10] Voice 3: something to add i had a yeah i had a motion let's see what okay um i moved that the south

[2:59:15] Voice 3: spring local trust committee direct staff to make the necessary amendments to the housing section

[2:59:21] Voice 3: from the ocp to ensure bylaw 530 is in line with it and have it prepared for requests without

[2:59:30] meeting

[2:59:30] Voice 8: by november 22nd so moved uh i'll

[2:59:41] Voice 3: second that and then maybe we can get some clarification

[3:00:00] Voice 3: we can't proceed an ocp amendment from the resolution well that that's one question and

[3:00:09] i would think that maybe make should be prepared or his

[3:00:16] Voice 3: staff can make what staff can make

[3:00:19] Voice 3: amendments until we discuss bylaw 530 the next time this is really about bylaw 530 it should be

[3:00:25] Voice 3: not discuss prepared right yeah um and i do see what you're you're saying and it it is directly

[3:00:35] Voice 3: when it's related to both but also it's related to enabling by the file of my 30 so

[3:00:43] Voice 8: early amendment prepared i

[3:00:48] Voice 3: i have an alternative suggestion to help okay and i think actually i

[3:00:53] Voice 3: i mean i i agree uh trust patrick i think this that we can we can fold this into 14.2 because

[3:01:01] Voice 3: it is directly so let's just table that for a moment we'll get right back to it here

[3:01:12] Voice 3: um we do have and what i'd like to do actually first is let's uh the staff report um from rpm

[3:01:23] Voice 3: him hutton and i'd like to hear from him and then we'll go back to this and and trustee patrick

[3:01:33] Voice 3: apparently has an alternative as well so let's hear from mr hutton first uh well thank you mr

[3:01:40] Voice 3: chair um this uh bylaw this report essentially just covers off um from the last meeting um ldc

[3:01:47] Voice 3: had asked us to prepare um a revised bylaw um based on the direction um received that meeting

[3:01:57] Voice 3: um essentially um it just follows up on what we've asked we've created a schedule m uh in a draft

[3:02:10] Voice 3: and uh shifted this away from a zone based to a map based um allowance of uh accessory voting

[3:02:19] Voice 3: And the one thing to note that wasn't clarified in this is that in the requests to eliminate properties within Schedule I that are also in the saltwater intrusion area from Schedule M,

[3:02:37] Voice 3: the the way that the saltwater intrusion is information is laid out in that report

[3:02:46] Voice 3: is is pixelated so it doesn't follow property lines doesn't say this property is in a saltwater

[3:02:56] Voice 3: intrusion area so i did consult with the freshwater analysts uh and sort of looked at

[3:03:05] Voice 3: where these sites are, and so it's a bit of an approximation of what the recommendation

[3:03:09] Voice 3: has to do with a conservative approach, and if or not it has a very 10% coverage, it's

[3:03:19] Voice 3: been excluded from this bylaw.

[3:03:24] Voice 3: That's just my information.

[3:03:27] Voice 3: Overall, this is pretty much what you got.

[3:03:31] Voice 3: Yeah. The one thing I will note is Mr. Tingle did circulate university presented this as a draft bylaws. The bylaw that has been drawn up has not been read. That is the previous bylaws, the proposed bylaw.

[3:03:45] Voice 3: And so I know that you're going to get into this conversation. So proposed bylaw number 530 is the one that you rescinded second reading of last week, which is the old zone-based bylaw.

[3:03:56] Voice 3: on uh per lpc direction we have provided draft file number 530 um which is um which is the

[3:04:08] Voice 3: map based version um

[3:04:10] Voice 8: so

[3:04:11] Voice 3: that's there for you so you can you're welcome to consider it i have to

[3:04:18] Voice 3: apologize i really put it on the motion in front of the members this one i have before 5 30 should

[3:04:23] Voice 3: have come first before i was from that group and then that's fine so it's so we can still

[3:04:33] Voice 3: uh come to it as uh as we so in relation to this report um any questions to uh

[3:04:44] Voice 3: as as i am sure christy harris has been doing the same as i've been doing it's like how can

[3:04:55] Voice 3: we get from me to get what we want you know through the uprights as they they say in the

[3:05:05] Voice 3: football fan um and it dawned on me after after last night actually it was actually the staff

[3:05:16] Voice 3: that kind of helped invite them and and the proposed legislation of bill 44 may have helped

[3:05:25] Voice 3: as well um yeah i understand we're ending up with this i'm calling it bylaw 530 light

[3:05:34] Voice 3: this mapped version for a better way of describing it um under the concerns that there

[3:05:42] Voice 3: there could be a you know a debate or discussion about those key informants whether or not we

[3:05:48] Voice 3: We agree with it.

[3:05:50] Voice 3: It could happen.

[3:05:53] Voice 3: In our last meeting in the October staff report, staff had thrown in the staff report potential idea of looking at spot rezoning as a possibility.

[3:06:08] Voice 3: And I know when I first read that, I was like, yuck, no, that's just going to cause freeze.

[3:06:15] Voice 3: But at about 2 a.m., I think it hit me last night, you were mentioning what were some of the things in this proposed legislation that are going to end up, that we aren't exempted from.

[3:06:31] Voice 3: And one of those is if it is conforming with the OCP, then we are obligated to waive the public hearing.

[3:06:42] Voice 3: It's not a choice.

[3:06:43] Voice 3: So I came up with sort of an idea of how to allow us to proceed with the OCP in a good way to build on our attempts to begin our relationships with the many nations that have interests.

[3:07:12] Voice 3: that if if we were to proceed to public hearing with bylaw 530 light um that we also request staff

[3:07:26] Voice 3: to um prepare a uh spot zoning pilot program uh to be implemented upon this bylaw 530 lights

[3:07:40] Voice 3: adoption that uh that program you know we can direct that it have lower fees uh because it

[3:07:47] Voice 3: should have a lot lower fees because it doesn't have to go to public hearing it would be in

[3:07:51] Voice 3: it would it would meet the the argument of um of uh few and minor because it's uh

[3:07:58] Voice 3: you know we already know it's going to be q and minor but and um it would allow anyone outside

[3:08:04] Voice 3: that map zone to proceed with the spot zone and the public hearing must be waived so

[3:08:12] Voice 3: at least while we carry on with the OCP we haven't caused a fight we're going into the OCP with

[3:08:20] Voice 3: with the you know to have this conversation we could kick off this spot zoning pilot

[3:08:27] Voice 3: that would allow for lots outside that map zone to have a path forward while we hopefully find

[3:08:34] Voice 3: a permanent solution through the other project i don't know if that makes sense but that's what

[3:08:42] Voice 3: came to me about 2 a.m so if i can summarize to see if i've got it clear what what your proposal

[3:08:51] Voice 3: would be is to proceed with the as you're calling at the 530 light which uh we're advised uh isn't

[3:09:00] Voice 3: contrary to the ocp and shouldn't have trouble getting through um executive committee and

[3:09:09] um isn't

[3:09:13] Voice 3: uh it's perhaps more in line with the first nation's concern and in addition to that

[3:09:22] Voice 3: add a spot zoning pilot project which would allow properties outside of the map

[3:09:30] Voice 3: designated in 530 light to apply for accessory dwelling units is that correct

[3:09:38] Voice 3: to basically and

[3:09:40] Voice 1: then that and

[3:09:41] Voice 3: that because then it would be few i mean we already know

[3:09:46] Voice 3: not everyone's going to sign up but since it would be few and minor then it wouldn't trigger

[3:09:50] Voice 3: we wouldn't need a public hearing for each of those um spot zoning applications

[3:09:59] Voice 3: and the application fee because of no public hearing to be like assumed substantially reduced

[3:10:08] Voice 3: and so it's sort of it's sort of taking the um objections to the original 530 the fear

[3:10:21] Voice 3: are taking those out taking away the threat of uh perhaps not passing executive committee

[3:10:28] Voice 3: and then with the spot zoning pilot adding ways to add more on honest on a per application basis

[3:10:37] Voice 3: but that's expensive and not causing the not triggering public hearing way to sort of expand

[3:10:46] Voice 3: beyond the original map based on individual applications is that essentially what it's

[3:10:52] Voice 3: correct because

[3:10:52] Voice 3: the the 530 life will bring in the regulations that those will now be in line

[3:10:59] Voice 3: used by law so they exist um and then it's a matter of okay well what outside that map

[3:11:05] Voice 3: area this gives them a path while we carry on with the mcp and hopefully fix the ocp

[3:11:12] Voice 3: um and um so the spot zoning can i ask a question

[3:11:18] Voice 3: where is how big anywhere that would be part i think that's part of the project to look at

[3:11:24] Voice 3: basically it should be as as what we were intending as many zones as we can outside the

[3:11:31] Voice 3: right and then so instead of just saying you can do it anywhere um it's you can you can apply

[3:11:41] Voice 3: apply anywhere right so that it's not saying okay we're gonna allow this everywhere it's saying

[3:11:50] Voice 3: everywhere could apply for a spot so if they want if they

[3:11:54] Voice 3: want it while we carry on

[3:11:55] Voice 3: and I'd like I'd

[3:11:57] Voice 3: like to just pause for a minute and and get some feedback from staff to me this sounds like uh

[3:12:03] Voice 3: potentially a a solution to some of our laundry here um but I just like to hear from staff on

[3:12:10] Voice 3: the notion of the spot zoning sort of as accessory to the 530 light yeah um the change essentially

[3:12:19] Voice 3: mr chair is that um where previously you simply had it in zones anybody

[3:12:29] Voice 3: does stipulate that um when we have a zoning bylaw uh property owner has the rights to apply for

[3:12:36] Voice 3: or any amendment including an amendment to the land use bylaws.

[3:12:40] Voice 3: I mean, they have the right to do that.

[3:12:42] Voice 3: There's no restriction on applying for zoning.

[3:12:45] Voice 3: And the MLCC must consider it if it brings forward

[3:12:48] Voice 3: to consider it.

[3:12:50] Voice 3: So the idea here would be that you'd simply

[3:12:55] Voice 3: be applying to amend that map rather than have your zoning

[3:12:58] Voice 3: changed, add your part of the map,

[3:13:01] Voice 3: and that's the land use permission, which is basically

[3:13:04] Voice 3: what that what schedule does so that's that's that simple in terms of yes anywhere could apply

[3:13:14] Voice 3: typically in order to provide a fast track ideally you'd have some kind of criteria to meet

[3:13:20] Voice 3: that's what worked in the past in my experience due to just a set of policies not that much

[3:13:28] Voice 3: different than what this this bylaw um bylaw indicates if there was some sort of criteria and

[3:13:37] Voice 3: uh especially class around you know if it's if it's less work for our staff uh and we're even

[3:13:45] Voice 3: able to waive a public here there's certainly rationale for um seeking to amend uh application

[3:13:51] Voice 3: that's um that's the direction okay so it sounds to me like you're saying this proposal is

[3:13:58] Voice 3: very feasible off the cuff it is uh i think of course yeah obviously you have to like do a

[3:14:05] Voice 3: little bit of work to yeah be clear of that but yeah okay so back to you trustee what kind of a

[3:14:15] Voice 3: reduction at application well i think we'd have to ask staff to come back you know they have to

[3:14:20] Voice 3: come up with a number i think we would direct them to this is a pilot that i know what looked

[3:14:25] Voice 3: to lots of other municipalities where they do pilots they have reduced fees as a result so i

[3:14:30] Voice 3: think we have the i'm sure they're going to say the executive committee but that's what the bylaws

[3:14:34] Voice 3: ours we can

[3:14:36] Voice 3: push the equation i know there's apologies there's only 10 but hey it's our

[3:14:40] Voice 3: bylaw the setting of um the setting of fees needs to be cost reflective right so if there's a clear

[3:14:47] Voice 3: argument where so i think you're it's not necessarily a program that you would implement

[3:14:51] Voice 3: meant to be a monolithically but you would this might be a rolling process where we're going to

[3:14:56] Voice 3: report back on what is criteria for this uh and if you have established criteria comfortable with

[3:15:02] Voice 3: that um then we can look at like how much time this is going to take staff what's the cost of

[3:15:07] Voice 3: public hearing um and and giving you a clear number of what that reduction would be but it

[3:15:12] Voice 3: would be we provide

[3:15:12] Voice 1: it's taking the

[3:15:13] Voice 3: cost off would there have to be a public hearing no that's the

[3:15:18] Voice 8: point

[3:15:18] Voice 3: that we would have to have a public hearing on the 5 30 light but these pilot pilot spot

[3:15:25] Voice 3: zonings would not require a public hearing so that makes each of those potentially a significantly

[3:15:31] Voice 3: cheaper application first second we have public hearings on the day so if bill 44 goes through a

[3:15:39] Voice 3: proposed we must not have a public hearing it's consistent with the ocp and if all we're doing is

[3:15:44] Voice 3: adding thinking use at awkward piecemeal um that were more or less consistent with the ocp right

[3:15:52] Voice 3: ah sorry i think clearly this morning

[3:15:54] Voice 3: this right well this this sounds like a potentially a really

[3:16:00] Voice 3: positive way forward assuming for a minute that we might proceed with this what uh sort of uh

[3:16:08] Voice 3: direction would staff need in terms of the the spot zoning pilot projects i hear uh criteria or

[3:16:19] Voice 3: would we ask you to do some analysis and um create a possible criteria or how do you want

[3:16:29] Voice 3: to develop that the request would be if you're moving past pilot and moving on to this process

[3:16:39] Voice 3: process, we could certainly just take the direction,

[3:16:44] Voice 3: pass a resolution that would just explore ways

[3:16:48] Voice 3: to create policy that would facilitate accelerated

[3:16:54] Voice 3: permission of ADUs, for example.

[3:16:56] Voice 3: Because the previous report actually

[3:16:58] Voice 3: had a resolution to support the creation of that.

[3:17:02] Voice 3: Basically, a standing resolution to pass,

[3:17:05] Voice 3: that's the way LPC is about policy, to say,

[3:17:10] Voice 3: just about the policy to uh identify sites that are ideal for even use um applications okay so

[3:17:23] Voice 3: that would be that would be the policy but um sure sure sure yeah and i mean i know i don't suppose

[3:17:30] Voice 3: that we need to hammer out every detail of every word at this at this moment and assuming that we

[3:17:36] Voice 3: we proceed in this manner um sort of try to get an idea of what what level of direction will be

[3:17:43] Voice 3: appropriate towards the staff at this point so um we'll see there's a lot of moving parts to that

[3:17:49] Voice 3: um yeah no 44s there's a big one um sure we don't

[3:17:53] Voice 1: know how that's going to play out yeah well you

[3:17:55] Voice 3: know it's the staff capacity is a big one too for us so yeah um you know it's just how do we balance

[3:18:01] Voice 3: with the projects we don't need bill 44 to pass because we have the right to waive by a public

[3:18:09] Voice 3: uh hearing that's compliant with the ocp so we can set that up into the into the pilot program

[3:18:15] Voice 3: or project whatever you want to call it um just take that proactive stance yeah so okay we don't

[3:18:24] Voice 3: so that

[3:18:24] Voice 8: we don't need we're

[3:18:25] Voice 8: not dependent right so

[3:18:26] Voice 3: then regardless of whether uh our request to

[3:18:31] Voice 3: be included in the provisions of bill 44 then procedurally what we would do is we would

[3:18:38] Voice 3: we would uh advance 5 30 light as we're referring to it today and then give direction on this

[3:18:46] Voice 3: spot zoning pilot project to get some staff i guess a staff report and then um

[3:18:54] Voice 3: 5 30 like we'd go to public hearing and then we'd proceed with the pilot spot zoning pilot project

[3:19:01] Voice 3: hopefully they'd come together at the adoption that would be ideal so what's the time

[3:19:06] Voice 3: well if we go to public hearing in december is that feasible

[3:19:15] Voice 3: a little less it would be i think you'd be right now we're kind of if that's

[3:19:21] Voice 3: from mid to early December 20th.

[3:19:24] Voice 3: I don't think that's an ideal time.

[3:19:26] Voice 8: Yeah, I mean,

[3:19:27] Voice 3: so it seems to me,

[3:19:29] Voice 3: do we just let it finish first?

[3:19:30] Voice 3: Mid-January, I think.

[3:19:31] Voice 3: Mid-January.

[3:19:32] Voice 3: Okay, well, I think we have a,

[3:19:34] Voice 3: we do have another public hearing in the wings

[3:19:36] Voice 3: and it would actually be nice

[3:19:37] Voice 3: to co-schedule them,

[3:19:39] Voice 3: just for efficiency's sake.

[3:19:43] Voice 3: We have an idea of what the time

[3:19:45] Voice 3: for that public hearing is,

[3:19:46] Voice 3: so that's a long run.

[3:19:52] Voice 3: For a lot of us.

[3:19:53] Voice 3: So going out,

[3:19:54] Voice 3: we can't hold over.

[3:19:55] Voice 3: We can't have a public hearing, because I haven't had a public hearing, it can't be held until the furlough is complete.

[3:20:02] Voice 3: Yeah, right.

[3:20:03] Voice 3: First Nations furlough is on this.

[3:20:08] Voice 3: Yeah.

[3:20:09] Voice 3: I wouldn't hold much as our accepted norm, so mid-January is the earliest.

[3:20:19] Voice 3: Mid to late January is probably about what we can do after a double public hearing, if those things line up.

[3:20:27] Voice 3: Okay.

[3:20:28] Voice 3: Okay. And we wouldn't necessarily have to hold up the timing of one to wait for the other. If it looks like it's going to push it back, that's significant.

[3:20:39] Voice 3: From a budget perspective, I would advise you that we are.

[3:20:42] Voice 3: Right.

[3:20:42] Voice 3: On our budget right now.

[3:20:45] Voice 3: Yeah.

[3:20:46] Voice 3: So that's my own.

[3:20:47] Voice 3: Darn fiscal.

[3:20:49] Voice 3: Bylaw 530 is, well, I mean, I should probably take that back. Bylaw 530 has a special budget, so.

[3:20:54] Voice 3: Okay.

[3:20:55] Voice 3: We can book that public period.

[3:20:57] Voice 3: Okay.

[3:20:58] Voice 3: But, yeah, I take your point, though.

[3:21:00] Voice 3: December 20th is not a great time to look at a public hearing.

[3:21:03] Voice 3: So early January would be better.

[3:21:06] Voice 3: So it seems to me that we've already engaged First Nations on regional bylaw 530.

[3:21:14] Voice 3: There's no referrals.

[3:21:15] Voice 3: We don't refer out to bylaw 530.

[3:21:17] Voice 3: We just have to go to public hearing.

[3:21:19] Voice 3: The other public hearing is open right now, which is the Musgrave landing.

[3:21:24] Voice 3: Gotcha.

[3:21:25] Voice 3: Okay.

[3:21:25] Voice 3: right so it also seems to me that 530 light is completely in mind yeah that's the point yeah so

[3:21:35] Voice 3: we don't need a public hearing except and

[3:21:38] Voice 3: i would be inclined to waive the public hearing and would

[3:21:42] Voice 3: be happy to do so for 530 days and i really think that's the route we ought to take and we're going

[3:21:47] Voice 3: hear from here um speaking with uh director marler once a bylaw has had first reading

[3:21:57] Voice 3: you have to declare the intention not to hold a public hearing before you

[3:22:07] Voice 8: give up any readings

[3:22:09] Voice 3: that's okay i mean that's not the end of it okay we can rescind

[3:22:13] Voice 3: well the

[3:22:14] Voice 3: reading or the first reading we we do

[3:22:19] Voice 3: if i may i i understand your logic

[3:22:22] Voice 3: we did speak about this we could defeat bylaw 530 and read i believe the proposed bylaw that

[3:22:31] Voice 3: you're speaking about bylaw 530 light we could we would defeat bylaw 530 present the draft bylaw

[3:22:41] Voice 3: which i would get a new number for and propose no hearing and then give it first reading

[3:22:49] Voice 3: second reading third reading and send it to ec you can you can do second or first second

[3:22:58] Voice 3: and um and request second request that we're going to find you no we were suggesting before

[3:23:07] Voice 3: before we even do it that we're not going to have the oh sorry yeah we're trying because

[3:23:12] Voice 3: Because the conversation is that the draft by-law presented in the report is in line with the OCP.

[3:23:23] Voice 3: So it's possible to avoid public hearing if we make the draft by-law presented in the report a new by-law.

[3:23:33] Voice 3: But you will need to defeat by-law 530 so that I can clear it from the books.

[3:23:39] Voice 3: Or rescind it. Does the word

[3:23:43] Voice 3: defeat have to be in there?

[3:23:45] Voice 3: I'm assuming birth is essentially, it's fine.

[3:23:49] Voice 1: It's like

[3:23:49] Voice 3: the word better sounds a little nicer in my head.

[3:23:52] Voice 1: Let's do that now.

[3:23:53] Voice 3: I'm just wondering, in terms of timing, what's reasonable here for expectation?

[3:24:04] Voice 3: I mean, it sounds like if we go to the public hearing group, we're looking at mid-January.

[3:24:08] Voice 3: Is there reason to think if we follow this proposed group that this could happen sooner?

[3:24:16] Voice 8: Seems like it.

[3:24:22] Voice 8: Notify for what period of time, Mr. Pingel?

[3:24:24] Voice 8: Because the pen should

[3:24:25] Voice 8: read this a third.

[3:24:25] Voice 8: We could do third and adopt it for the next meeting.

[3:24:27] Voice 8: Is that right?

[3:24:32] Voice 8: We don't waive public hearings every day.

[3:24:38] Voice 8: No, I know.

[3:24:39] Voice 8: That's not a very popular approach, necessarily.

[3:24:46] Voice 8: So we may, with the

[3:24:53] Voice 3: new bylaw, as I understand it,

[3:24:57] Voice 3: we can play a public hearing. We can read first, second, and third time and send it to

[3:25:08] Voice 3: the executive committee. I mean, we're dealing with something closer to administrative bylaws,

[3:25:15] Voice 3: which I had an experience with, our peace bylaw, whichever, and we do three readings

[3:25:21] Voice 3: in one sitting and send it to GC, and then the fourth reading is the adoption.

[3:25:25] Voice 3: option. So I don't, you know, although this proposal to not have public hearing is unique,

[3:25:37] Voice 3: the procedure, once you've made that decision, would be, I believe, all in one sitting. We have

[3:25:45] Voice 3: a draft that's in front of you, you know, the process of getting it to executive for review,

[3:25:56] Voice 3: And they would, I assume, be reviewing it to ensure we follow adequate procedure.

[3:26:01] Voice 3: If it truly was allowed to avoid public hearing, that would be part of their review.

[3:26:06] Voice 3: So it could come back to us regardless.

[3:26:15] Voice 8: That's my

[3:26:16] Voice 3: understanding of it.

[3:26:19] Voice 3: I can do further review.

[3:26:22] Voice 3: But that seems to make a lot of sense.

[3:26:27] Voice 3: Yes.

[3:26:29] Voice 3: Could we schedule a special electronic meeting to do those readings?

[3:26:35] Voice 3: Do you need to renumber a bylaw and bring a staff package?

[3:26:39] Voice 3: Could we do a special electronic meeting just to do that?

[3:26:43] Voice 3: Mr. Delaney, do you plan to

[3:26:44] Voice 8: renumber the bylaw?

[3:26:49] Voice 8: I would only request

[3:26:55] Voice 3: to slow it down to make sure that we don't create an administrative error

[3:26:58] Voice 3: that causes you to

[3:27:01] Voice 3: then have

[3:27:02] Voice 3: they

[3:27:02] Voice 5: don't want to come back to this later

[3:27:04] Voice 3: have the EC say what

[3:27:05] Voice 3: you did it wrong

[3:27:06] Voice 3: I'm giving you my best advice

[3:27:10] Voice 3: the

[3:27:19] Voice 8: so

[3:27:23] Voice 3: as it stands I can

[3:27:27] Voice 3: like if you would like to

[3:27:30] Voice 3: bylaw can be generated

[3:27:33] Voice 3: very quickly

[3:27:34] Voice 3: you know we can have the bylaw number

[3:27:36] Voice 3: and I can do that work today

[3:27:38] Voice 3: day it's not impossible the day during this meeting yeah i mean it's a computer it's a request

[3:27:44] Voice 3: of the computer and i'm not i'm not saying that it's the best practice okay and

[3:27:51] Voice 5: so my other

[3:27:52] Voice 3: double check my other

[3:27:54] Voice 3: piece would be when we talk about a special electronic meeting

[3:27:59] Voice 3: and working on a bylaw i'm not clear whether that's allowed so then you know here we are in

[3:28:06] Voice 3: in public you know at a regular

[3:28:08] Voice 3: meeting yeah if we do this work um i i know i can get you a number

[3:28:15] Voice 3: i know i can do these things if you direct us to have a special meeting i might find out that the

[3:28:20] Voice 3: special meeting is where the hiccup is and so you know my recommendation if we want you know and

[3:28:28] Voice 3: this is going slow to get it right as quickly as possible would be that you know that we

[3:28:38] Voice 3: that we that we either well not my recommendation wouldn't be to do it now but to do it in december

[3:28:46] Voice 3: uh yeah that because then i could have all that information for you yeah the motion would be

[3:28:53] Voice 3: and it wouldn't require the rescindment or defeat of bylaw 530 at this time because you could say

[3:29:03] Voice 3: uh you know the ltc requests staff to um review draft the draft presented in the report

[3:29:16] Voice 3: as a bylaw for presentation at the next meeting without public hearing and free readings

[3:29:24] Voice 3: at the next meeting

[3:29:26] Voice 11: yeah you would do all the

[3:29:27] Voice 3: work at the next meeting because we would have

[3:29:29] Voice 3: all the opening to all the right people look at all the right documents um and then it will be a

[3:29:34] Voice 3: christmas present to the community well that this makes sense to me and especially in terms of um

[3:29:40] Voice 3: like you say getting making sure you've got everything right legislatively to to defer that

[3:29:49] Voice 3: those actions to to the december meeting that makes i mean in terms of making giving you the

[3:29:56] Voice 3: the opportunity and the time to make sure that you're fully confident.

[3:30:00] Voice 3: the legislative

[3:30:01] Voice 3: end of it

[3:30:04] Voice 3: that doesn't seem unreasonable

[3:30:06] Voice 3: yeah I mean

[3:30:08] Voice 3: I don't know whether

[3:30:12] Voice 3: the RPM

[3:30:13] Voice 3: about the ability to do bylaws

[3:30:15] Voice 3: electronically in your

[3:30:17] Voice 3: previous experience

[3:30:19] Voice 3: my previous experiences

[3:30:22] Voice 3: regular meetings

[3:30:23] Voice 3: is the better place to do

[3:30:25] Voice 3: bylaws but we don't want to put any of our

[3:30:27] Voice 3: legislative program

[3:30:29] Voice 3: in jeopardy for

[3:30:31] Voice 3: somehow not being it seems to me that we're potentially fast tracking just by deciding

[3:30:40] Voice 3: that we might be able to do it on december 14th yeah so i said let's do it i'm content with that

[3:30:47] Voice 3: but i mean if we find out we can do it and it could happen and you know it doesn't preclude

[3:30:52] Voice 3: us from calling a special meeting that's true

[3:30:54] Voice 3: so yeah so

[3:30:55] Voice 1: we still have that

[3:30:56] Voice 3: option at any time we

[3:30:57] Voice 3: do that if we're

[3:30:58] Voice 8: going to make some resolutions

[3:30:59] Voice 3: uh uh directing staff on this then that could be

[3:31:03] Voice 3: uh you know it's an accessory uh uh resolution to you know if staff discovers that it can be done

[3:31:12] Voice 3: by a special meeting blah blah do we

[3:31:15] Voice 11: need to wrestle so i think we're going

[3:31:16] Voice 3: to need a couple

[3:31:16] Voice 3: resolutions then perhaps um and do we need to make one about the squad so yes i've got that one yeah

[3:31:24] Voice 1: okay

[3:31:24] Voice 3: so one would be one would be directing staff um to provide

[3:31:33] Voice 8: um a new bylaw number

[3:31:40] Voice 3: um for what we have been referring the draft we have been referring to as 5 30 light

[3:31:54] Voice 3: okay um and then another would be uh to request staff to prepare the new bylaw

[3:32:11] Voice 3: or readings um at the december meeting another would be to request staff to advise it's possible

[3:32:23] Voice 3: to give those readings in a special meeting to advise the ltc and prepare an rwm and then the

[3:32:34] Voice 3: other one would be the spot zoning does that seem like we're covering what we need to cover

[3:32:37] Voice 3: in terms of direction for staff so

[3:32:42] Voice 11: you have a request to have to provide a new bylaw number

[3:32:47] Voice 11: for a new accessory dwelling and then you have requests to have to prepare a new accessory

[3:32:52] Voice 11: dwelling unit by law for for reading at the december 14th regular meeting and then i didn't

[3:32:58] Voice 11: get anything the

[3:33:00] Voice 3: other one would be

[3:33:02] Voice 3: uh requesting special meeting to uh to determine whether uh

[3:33:08] Voice 3: those meetings could be held at a special meeting.

[3:33:12] Voice 3: And if so, to prepare a special meeting.

[3:33:20] Voice 3: You

[3:33:20] Voice 8: know, there aren't going to be any special meetings.

[3:33:33] Voice 8: It feels really nice.

[3:33:34] Voice 8: It's kind of getting talked blind.

[3:33:36] Voice 8: I can't see.

[3:33:43] Voice 8: Thanks, Laura.

[3:33:44] Voice 8: That's fine.

[3:33:54] Voice 8: Wow.

[3:34:15] Voice 8: Like I said, 2

[3:34:19] Voice 3: in the morning.

[3:34:20] Voice 3: It's like that's too bad.

[3:34:21] Voice 3: They need to hear it just like they're not.

[3:34:24] Voice 3: I know.

[3:34:24] Voice 3: one else we're essentially doing that yeah okay we're taking it in the way that it's

[3:34:30] Voice 3: sorry yeah okay i can't get it onto your screen unfortunately that's okay

[3:34:37] Voice 3: so we're looking at

[3:34:38] Voice 3: a number of resolutions do you want them all separated or can we do the

[3:34:43] Voice 3: omnibus or what i think hey i think direction on the draft bylaw as presented could be one

[3:34:52] Voice 3: okay um the spot zoning should be a separate one sure yeah

[3:34:56] Voice 3: that that's a different action

[3:34:59] Voice 3: um but yeah okay but one more accessory one and two could be one or should we just do them one

[3:35:07] Voice 3: at a time

[3:35:07] Voice 8: that's what we can do these are repetitive yeah

[3:35:20] Voice 3: okay one or the other yeah

[3:35:25] Voice 3: Yeah, I would just say prepare a new bylaw, replicating proposed bylaw number 530 presented on the case.

[3:35:36] Voice 3: Does that make sense?

[3:35:40] Voice 11: It's

[3:35:41] Voice 3: just renumbering the proposed bylaw.

[3:35:44] Voice 3: As presented in November

[3:35:47] Voice 8: 660 in the staff report.

[3:35:52] Voice 8: And then so the second one is redundant.

[3:36:11] Voice 3: Correct.

[3:36:12] Voice 3: Correct. I felt that it was okay.

[3:36:15] Voice 8: Yeah, you could just add it

[3:36:16] Voice 3: for for for consideration at

[3:36:20] Voice 3: December 16. Well, we're asking the next motion. The

[3:36:24] Voice 3: next motion is asking us to see if we can do it sooner. Yes.

[3:36:29] Voice 3: You know, by special meeting. Okay.

[3:36:31] Voice 3: uh so okay so the first one pick up the data i think that will yeah yeah that's true from the

[3:36:39] Voice 3: period yes and then that next paragraph can disappear

[3:36:43] Voice 8: as well okay all right so we're down

[3:36:51] Voice 8: to three that makes more sense and

[3:36:54] Voice 3: it doesn't matter it doesn't have to be specific because

[3:36:57] Voice 3: it'll be about any bylaw readings and the spot zoning pilot program is pretty clear which means

[3:37:06] Voice 3: anybody who wants to apply can apply is that correct yes

[3:37:15] Voice 3: well we are going to get

[3:37:17] Voice 3: we are going to get staff to bring that the spot zoning part back

[3:37:20] Voice 3: to us anyway so we can uh to look at it amended if we need if it's not doing what you wanted to do

[3:37:27] Voice 3: all right so i would like to make a nice mr chairman preview on that yeah i mean the spot

[3:37:32] Voice 3: is maybe a little bit of a separate matter altogether but some direction on on what you

[3:37:38] Voice 3: want me to want to bring back specifically is it um are you looking for policy criteria um

[3:37:45] Voice 4: why don't we

[3:37:46] Voice 3: work on these first two and then we'll discuss that for the third one in a bit

[3:37:51] Voice 3: more detail so would someone like to move uh the first one please uh oh sorry it's moving around

[3:38:03] Voice 3: um local trust committee request staff to prepare a new bylaw number replicating bylaw 530 as

[3:38:10] Voice 3: presented in the staff report dated november 16 2023 we'll have a seconder a discussion

[3:38:17] Voice 3: all the questions all in favor motion carries the second one please

[3:38:25] Voice 3: trust committee request staff to look into whether bylaw readings

[3:38:29] Voice 3: could be held at a special meeting

[3:38:32] Voice 3: or by a resolution without meeting.

[3:38:34] Voice 3: Moved. Second.

[3:38:36] Voice 3: Discussion?

[3:38:38] Voice 3: I'll call the question. All in favor?

[3:38:40] Voice 3: Motion carries.

[3:38:41] Voice 3: Now we're going to work on the third one.

[3:38:43] Voice 3: I love what

[3:38:44] Voice 10: they're going to say.

[3:38:45] Voice 10: Do we not want to rescind the other one?

[3:38:48] Voice 10: We

[3:38:48] Voice 3: don't have to.

[3:38:49] Voice 10: We don't

[3:38:49] Voice 10: have to at this moment.

[3:38:51] Voice 3: We can do that all at the next.

[3:38:53] Voice 3: Whenever we

[3:38:55] Voice 3: travel to the next one, we'll do it all

[3:38:57] Voice 3: in one

[3:38:57] Voice 3: go because then we're

[3:39:00] Voice 3: yeah then we're not trying to craft on the blood okay so we can stick with five millions

[3:39:05] Voice 3: i think if we close the door okay uh considering there's a considering criteria

[3:39:16] Voice 3: um fees and fees yes

[3:39:20] Voice 8: so that's the two issues this

[3:39:26] Voice 3: is at this point about tc how are you

[3:39:28] Voice 3: and do

[3:39:31] Voice 8: you want to see in the

[3:39:32] Voice 3: waving of public hearings or

[3:39:34] Voice 3: we need to have that in there or not no they're a little bit dependent on bill 44.

[3:39:40] Voice 3: so wait we could say we're going to leave it yeah so we can so maybe we better put that in

[3:39:46] Voice 3: the waving of public hearings potentially yeah the potential to wave public hearings

[3:39:53] Voice 3: because that comes from two ways do we need to say that about what we're going to do next month

[3:40:00] Voice 3: well you know you have to be clear won't we just start with this new one

[3:40:08] Voice 3: that's well is that not sort of implicit in no i think discussion yeah i think in the discussion

[3:40:12] Voice 3: and about and the motion asked that like i don't think you've got to be specific about that

[3:40:21] Voice 3: you'll have to say it clearly in the next week you'll have to say it in the

[3:40:25] Voice 5: in the next report

[3:40:26] Voice 5: or whether it's in December or based on the second,

[3:40:30] Voice 5: whether it can be done by special meeting or even resolution,

[3:40:35] Voice 5: but that meeting, that's a stretch.

[3:40:41] Voice 5: Everything that is presented to you will be laid out as,

[3:40:44] Voice 5: as we described the

[3:40:46] Voice 3: rescinding of bylaw 530,

[3:40:49] Voice 3: the waving of public hearings for the new draft bylaw as presented.

[3:40:56] Voice 3: and then as many readings as we can get in as allowed through our research.

[3:41:02] Voice 3: So reading is crucial prior to.

[3:41:03] Voice 3: Exactly.

[3:41:04] Voice 3: And that is understood,

[3:41:06] Voice 3: and I don't think it needs to be explicit in a meeting.

[3:41:10] Voice 3: The second one, the second motion really shows that expediency is what we're looking for.

[3:41:17] Voice 3: Okay, so this third motion is ready then?

[3:41:20] Voice 3: Are we satisfied?

[3:41:21] Voice 3: Is that enough

[3:41:23] Voice 3: instruction as a staff?

[3:41:24] Voice 3: No.

[3:41:25] Voice 3: That's sufficient?

[3:41:26] Voice 3: Yeah. Okay. Someone like to move it, please?

[3:41:32] Voice 3: I'll move that the South Spring Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to develop a spot zoning pilot program for accessory dwelling units, considering the criteria, fees, and potential to waive public hearings.

[3:41:43] Voice 3: Moved. Seconded. Discussed. Not seeing any. I'll call the question. All in favor? Promotion carries.

[3:41:51] Voice 3: it is years ago and right um okay do we need anything further on this item today or can we

[3:42:01] Voice 3: move along okay so underneath business at 15.1 we have a housing agreement by law number four

[3:42:11] Voice 3: sorry sorry no we didn't i'm trying to end the meeting oh no sorry uh bylaw number 447 we have

[3:42:21] Voice 3: a staff report on h202s and that's uh planner fatino i believe nope sorry it's gonna be a

[3:42:32] Voice 3: minute we're just gonna get another uh

[3:42:37] Voice 8: straightened up here did the

[3:42:42] Voice 3: african show up or come in

[3:42:47] Voice 3: mr uh

[3:42:48] Voice 4: good afternoon um trustees and chair uh we do have um the uh van city representative

[3:42:59] Voice 4: that is on the call right now and we also have their legal counsel that will be joining at 2 30

[3:43:04] Voice 4: um their schedule was fairly packed so they they should be here right at 2 30

[3:43:10] Voice 4: um uh if if everybody is ready i can i can move on with my short presentation

[3:43:17] Voice 4: um did we need

[3:43:18] Voice 4: to wait till

[3:43:19] Voice 3: 2 30 then or

[3:43:20] Voice 4: no no i can go through it um and um and then hopefully

[3:43:25] Voice 4: Hopefully by then it will be, it will be 2.30.

[3:43:28] Voice 4: The purpose of this report is to provide the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee with

[3:43:32] Voice 4: information concerning a request from Vancouver City Savings Credit Union in regards to 584

[3:43:37] Voice 4: Rainbow Road to discharge a housing agreement for a 10 unit affordable housing unit or 10

[3:43:42] Voice 4: unit affordable housing development on the subject property.

[3:43:46] Voice 4: Subject property is 3.14 hectares and zoned rural under Salt Spring Island Land Use Bylaw

[3:43:52] Voice 4: 355.

[3:43:53] Voice 4: In 2008, the owner applied for a variation to the zoning bylaw that would apply only to the subject property and permit development of affordable housing units.

[3:44:04] Voice 4: The Salt Spring Island LTC originally gave first and second reading to the proposal for 14 affordable housing dwelling units, but then the LTC ultimately approved a maximum density of 10 affordable units.

[3:44:15] Voice 4: Third reading was given to bylaw 441 on June 4th, 2009.

[3:44:19] Voice 4: 2009. At the June meeting, the LTC carried a number of resolutions, which included staff

[3:44:25] Voice 4: to prepare a housing agreement bylaw and also directed staff to further review proposed

[3:44:30] Voice 4: covenants and a letter of intent tabled by the applicant at the time. Before the authorization

[3:44:38] Voice 4: of the housing agreement, the LTC and the applicant executed a covenant. Section 23 and 24

[3:44:43] Voice 4: of the covenant require that 10 dwelling units be constructed over a four-year period beginning in

[3:44:49] Voice 4: 2010 and bylaw number 447 which authorized the housing agreement was given first second and third

[3:44:56] Voice 4: reading on September 2nd 2010 and was approved by executive committee and adopted on September 22nd

[3:45:02] Voice 4: 2010. The property is currently in foreclosure and section 43 of the housing agreement contemplates

[3:45:08] Voice 4: a foreclosure. Neither this requirement nor any other provision in the covenant is expressly

[3:45:14] Voice 4: contingent on a housing agreement therefore any future purchaser of the subject property would

[3:45:18] Voice 4: be bound by the covenant and would be required to build 10 units under the housing agreement

[3:45:24] Voice 4: otherwise the zoning allow would allow for only one single family dwelling unit the salt spring

[3:45:31] Voice 4: island land use bylaw presently permits the subject property to be used for one single family

[3:45:36] Voice 4: unit dwelling one single family dwelling and up to 10 affordable dwelling units and the land use

[3:45:43] Voice 4: bylaw defines dwelling units as it defines dwelling units affordable housing as the following

[3:45:49] Voice 4: a deed restricted and or a rent control dwelling unit that is secured by a housing agreement

[3:45:55] Voice 4: registered on title and may include special needs housing and senior dwelling units this could

[3:46:02] Voice 4: potentially lead to some confusion since the cancellation of the housing agreement through

[3:46:07] Voice 4: foreclosure could leave a possibility that a court-ordered purchaser could acquire the subject

[3:46:12] Voice 4: project property and benefit from the covenant requiring 10 dwelling units but not be bound

[3:46:19] Voice 4: by those units being affordable because the covenant does not specify that the units must

[3:46:25] Voice 4: be affordable.

[3:46:26] Voice 4: To avoid this scenario, it is important that the LTC and the purchaser enter into a new

[3:46:31] Voice 4: housing agreement.

[3:46:32] Voice 4: Due to the fact that the plans for this property to introduce 10 units of affordable housing

[3:46:37] Voice 4: on the island never came to fruition and the unfortunate reality of the current foreclosure

[3:46:42] Voice 4: the existing notice of housing agreement has become an encumbrance on the ltc goals

[3:46:47] Voice 4: additionally the lender through their legal counsel has requested the discharge of the

[3:46:51] Voice 4: housing agreement and have received an order of conduct and sale from the bc supreme court

[3:46:58] Voice 4: under section 43 of the housing agreement in this case that the court approves the sale the ltc will

[3:47:05] Voice 4: will abandon the agreement

[3:47:06] Voice 4: and cancel the notice of agreement in the records.

[3:47:08] Voice 4: The most logical and appropriate next steps

[3:47:10] Voice 4: would be to discharge the notice of housing agreement

[3:47:12] Voice 4: from the property at 584 Rainbow Road

[3:47:14] Voice 4: and negotiate a new housing agreement

[3:47:16] Voice 4: with the new purchaser.

[3:47:18] Voice 4: And as I said before,

[3:47:20] Voice 4: we do have a Van City representative on the call with us

[3:47:25] Voice 4: and the legal counsel will be here at 2.30

[3:47:28] Voice 4: to answer any other questions.

[3:47:33] Voice 8: Okay, did

[3:47:36] Voice 3: the Van City representative wanna add anything?

[3:47:40] Voice 3: and then i'll go to trustees for questions um

[3:47:45] Voice 6: hi there my name is chris freeman i'm a team manager

[3:47:48] Voice 6: at the fancy special accounts department um i think the only thing we can add is just uh what

[3:47:53] Voice 6: anthony we uh as you know van city shares the salt spring um island's goals of having this be

[3:48:01] Voice 6: affordable house in the future but uh with this housing agreement that's in place every offer

[3:48:06] Voice 6: we've ever tried to entertain including with other foundations and groups that are on the island

[3:48:11] Voice 6: it's just become a situation where they can't work with the terms that were set out back in 2010

[3:48:17] Voice 6: and so if this could be discharged and released and then they negotiate a new agreement with the

[3:48:24] Voice 6: society or the council that would really let us support that initiatives

[3:48:32] Voice 6: and let everybody kind of move forward and get get the housing on land we've had a couple offers

[3:48:37] Voice 6: that were different forms of affordable housing

[3:48:41] Voice 6: for medical professionals, things like that,

[3:48:43] Voice 6: that want to work on island and stuff,

[3:48:46] Voice 6: but they look at the agreement that's currently in place

[3:48:48] Voice 6: and they just simply can't work with it

[3:48:50] Voice 6: because of the terms of it.

[3:48:54] Voice 3: Okay, I think that, trustees, any questions?

[3:48:58] Voice 3: Actually, I don't have any questions at this point.

[3:49:00] Voice 3: I have heard from people in the community

[3:49:02] Voice 3: that have looked at the property in great detail.

[3:49:08] Voice 3: I'm more than happy to make the recommendation that's in front of us here, just to get on the way.

[3:49:21] Voice 3: Yeah, no, it's an important learning. I think that's hopefully what we as an agency need to do to recognize that our housing needs agreements have become just overly burdened.

[3:49:33] Voice 3: they're too site-specific or project-specific.

[3:49:40] Voice 3: Whereas housing options and available and affordable housing

[3:49:46] Voice 3: is gonna come in different forms

[3:49:48] Voice 3: so that the agreements need to be more flexible

[3:49:51] Voice 3: and easier for even our own staff

[3:49:54] Voice 3: and everyone to put in place.

[3:49:56] Voice 3: If we had more generic type housing agreements

[3:49:59] Voice 3: rather than so site-specific.

[3:50:02] Voice 3: um so uh no i absolutely uh support uh discharging this housing agreement thank you i have one

[3:50:12] Voice 3: question and uh and maybe it's just a matter of semantics but um uh the report says that the

[3:50:24] Voice 3: purchaser determines they do not want to enter a new housing agreement that only one single

[3:50:28] Voice 3: family dwelling would be permitted on the subject property as per the zoning conditions

[3:50:33] Voice 3: it goes on to say the only way that the extra density for the 10 units should be accessed

[3:50:40] Voice 3: if a housing agreement is entered into and i'm wondering if it's the the word should and

[3:50:48] Voice 3: because i'm wondering if that ought to be could um based on the sentence just preceding that

[3:51:02] Voice 4: sure through the chair which is the the page that you're looking on

[3:51:06] Voice 3: i'm looking at

[3:51:08] Voice 3: At page 204, just above the rationale for the paragraph, just above the rationale for recommendation.

[3:51:15] Voice 4: Okay.

[3:51:16] Voice 3: The last sentence in there.

[3:51:22] Voice 8: Okay.

[3:51:27] Voice 4: Yeah, so that was essentially, you know, saying that just based on what the zoning says, there needs to be a housing agreement in place for there to be the affordable housing units.

[3:51:44] Voice 4: So, if the new purchaser would like to endeavor to provide the 10 housing units, there will need to be a housing agreement.

[3:51:54] Voice 4: So, it is a condition based on the zoning.

[3:52:00] Voice 3: Okay. Thank you.

[3:52:03] Voice 3: All right.

[3:52:04] Voice 4: But

[3:52:04] Voice 3: is there a risk, then, though, that someone could buy the property and not pay the affordable housing?

[3:52:10] Voice 4: There is that risk.

[3:52:11] Voice 4: they would be in contravention of the zoning bylaw um um it's in that that's you know something that

[3:52:21] Voice 4: i i wanted to bring up in the the potential issues is that um and the um mr freeman had

[3:52:29] Voice 4: brought it up is there they also envision that this is for affordable housing so they share the

[3:52:35] Voice 4: same goal as the the salt spring island ltc and um based on my discussions with them um they they

[3:52:45] Voice 4: have indicated that they will make it very clear that this is you know what the the site was

[3:52:51] Voice 4: intended for and it's the purchaser would need to go through a housing agreement with uh the ltc

[3:52:58] Voice 4: so

[3:52:59] Voice 3: that make the sale dependent on entering into a new housing agreement uh

[3:53:06] Voice 4: if mr freeman would

[3:53:08] Voice 4: like to speak uh specifically to that um he he's uh welcome to yeah

[3:53:15] Voice 6: and this may be where um

[3:53:17] Voice 6: my our lawyer might have some additional he's not here yet but um i think that so in the foreclosure

[3:53:24] Voice 6: process we are only entertaining offers from groups that want to do um affordable housing

[3:53:29] Voice 6: projects so there's a couple that are kind of fell apart because of the housing agreement so

[3:53:35] Voice 6: we're not looking for people that just like our realtor and stuff how we market it we're not

[3:53:40] Voice 6: looking for people that just want to go back to the one and have the land for themselves so we

[3:53:45] Voice 6: can control that bit when we take it to court so we can only we can take offers where people who

[3:53:51] Voice 6: are totally like-minded with us to take that to court before we get a court I'm not sure a judge

[3:53:58] Voice 6: at the court and i can't speak will can better speak to this could make that a condition of the

[3:54:04] Voice 6: deal that they must negotiate the agreement because once a court orders that the sale be

[3:54:09] Voice 6: completed um that may not be in a clause they could enforce but um van city the offers like

[3:54:16] Voice 6: the offers that we're looking and the way we're marketing it all the people there is one foundation

[3:54:22] Voice 6: that was on island that was very interested but couldn't make the deal work with the numbers

[3:54:26] Voice 6: and there were two other offers in play um that were similar all for multi they want to use the

[3:54:33] Voice 6: 10 dwelling um for various different initiatives um and of course they would need to present that

[3:54:38] Voice 6: to your people um to make sure that that was what you wanted to do in the new agreement

[3:54:45] Voice 6: so that's that's kind of what we can control i hope that helps with your question well i think

[3:54:50] Voice 3: my understanding is van city you know that you are you have been proceeding in good faith and

[3:54:55] Voice 3: And that, you know, because you could have disposed of this a long time ago and quicker.

[3:55:03] Voice 3: We were very fortunate that it's Vancity that we're working with, not Big Bank X.

[3:55:11] Voice 3: So I think there is a risk, but hopefully that's being mitigated through the marketing and due diligence on your side.

[3:55:25] Voice 3: yeah

[3:55:26] Voice 6: i uh for sure we've been in this for a long time i think um we've been in it since i think the

[3:55:32] Voice 6: original financing changed um i think this goes back to mid 2012 13 ish so that's van city's goal

[3:55:42] Voice 6: we want to see uh affordable housing that's one of our pillars of our of our whole deal uh in in

[3:55:48] Voice 5: our

[3:55:48] Voice 6: community so um our reputation and that that's what we want so i mean we can give council that

[3:55:55] Voice 6: that assurance we will endeavor to do all that we're not looking to do um a fire sale and get

[3:56:00] Voice 6: out of it we've held this to your point we've this is like three years in we've been marketing it

[3:56:05] Voice 6: kind of trying to work with different societies and every time one comes up it's kind of like

[3:56:10] Voice 6: whack-a-mole disagreements what killed them all and made them walk away i'm

[3:56:16] Voice 3: very familiar with

[3:56:17] Voice 3: what's that and what's going on there with different um people wanting to purchase that and

[3:56:21] Voice 3: and to create a affordable housing there.

[3:56:26] Voice 3: I'm familiar with the property,

[3:56:27] Voice 3: I've worked there, built some trees.

[3:56:31] Voice 3: This is definitely gonna be a step in the right direction

[3:56:33] Voice 3: to create so much new housing.

[3:56:37] Voice 4: I'd just like to point out that legal counsel,

[3:56:40] Voice 4: William Roberts, has now joined us.

[3:56:45] Voice 3: Hey, great, thank you.

[3:56:47] Voice 3: Now that we have the legal counsel for Man City,

[3:56:50] Voice 3: there's any questions?

[3:56:52] Voice 3: questions that I don't have any questions anymore no I

[3:56:54] Voice 3: guess we could just repeat I think we kind of

[3:56:56] Voice 3: talked our way through it but I guess the legal counsel present would be good we were looking at

[3:57:01] Voice 3: just the risk of uh not having the housing agreement in place and that if um you know

[3:57:09] Voice 3: somebody could revert back to one dwelling um but we understood through one band City's

[3:57:18] Voice 3: commitment and the way the property is being marketed that they are only marketing it

[3:57:23] Voice 3: exclusively to people who are looking at affordable housing projects so yes it's a risk but through

[3:57:29] Voice 3: your reputation van city's reputation and marketing strategies that it's it's somewhat

[3:57:37] Voice 3: mitigated

[3:57:37] Voice 5: good and first sorry will roberts my apologies for being late um thank you for taking

[3:57:44] Voice 5: the time um and chris freeman's probably told you this that uh van city's for i don't know it feels

[3:57:50] Voice 5: like a long time now but certainly the last four years been trying to reach a resolution on this

[3:57:55] Voice 5: site um uh we are marketing it that way we're marketing it under and also in addition to what

[3:58:02] Voice 5: vente is doing it's also been marketed under the supervision of the court and so no sale can

[3:58:07] Voice 5: complete without court approval there's again i can't tell you what people are going to do in the

[3:58:14] Voice 5: future. I can't tell you what a purchaser, despite our best efforts, might want to do with the

[3:58:18] Voice 5: property. I would emphasize the word that you just used, which is risk mitigation. We would

[3:58:29] Voice 5: like this property to be used for the stated purposes. We think the court's supervision of

[3:58:34] Voice 5: that process is going to help mitigate the risk that somebody uses it for a different purpose.

[3:58:39] Voice 5: and Van City is going to do everything it can

[3:58:42] Voice 5: to make that happen.

[3:58:43] Voice 5: We can't promise you what somebody is going to do

[3:58:46] Voice 5: in the future.

[3:58:46] Voice 5: I don't think anybody can look that far ahead,

[3:58:49] Voice 5: but we're doing our best to mitigate that risk.

[3:58:53] Voice 3: No, thank you.

[3:58:57] Voice 3: All right, trustees,

[3:58:58] Voice 3: is anyone prepared to make a motion here?

[3:59:05] Voice 3: Okay, I'll move that the South Spring Island

[3:59:08] Voice 3: Local Trust Committee discharge the notice

[3:59:10] Voice 3: of housing agreement from the property

[3:59:12] Voice 3: at 584 Rainbow Road, with legal description as Lot A, Section 2, Range 1, East North Salt

[3:59:20] Voice 3: Spring Island, Cowichan District Plan 49990.

[3:59:24] Voice 3: So moved and seconded.

[3:59:26] Voice 3: Moved and seconded.

[3:59:27] Voice 3: Any further discussion?

[3:59:29] Voice 3: Seeing none, I'll call the question.

[3:59:31] Voice 3: All those in favor?

[3:59:32] Voice 3: And that motion carries.

[3:59:35] Voice 3: Thank you very much.

[3:59:37] Voice 6: Thank you, everybody.

[3:59:38] Voice 3: Thank you.

[3:59:39] Voice 3: Thank

[3:59:40] Voice 6: you very much, everybody.

[3:59:41] Voice 6: Mayor Mrakas,

[3:59:42] Voice 3: Okay, with that we move on to the report section 16 one is the policy and standing resolutions list at page 241 anything

[3:59:54] Voice 8: or maybe anything on that.

[4:00:01] Voice 8: not seeing anything we have

[4:00:02] Voice 3: the future projects report on page 252 anything there

[4:00:10] Voice 3: and then 16 3 the active projects list on page 255

[4:00:19] Voice 3: seeing anything there we have applications with status report on page 258

[4:00:27] Voice 3: mr chair yes sir we have application status i did want to note uh the exceptional work

[4:00:33] Voice 3: staff we've done um we've processed a high number of applications recently um about six or seven

[4:00:41] Voice 3: months ago we had about a six to eight month backlog um applications are now turning around

[4:00:47] Voice 3: a much more quick pace uh the fact it's sort of less normal processing time so um i just wanted

[4:00:53] Voice 3: to to acknowledge that i'm happy to just see that our development center goes back on track and we're

[4:00:58] Voice 3: we're looking forward to um that we'll be able to do that staff and support some of the projects

[4:01:06] Voice 3: thank you for noting that and i'm sure everyone involved uh appreciates the expedition of

[4:01:14] Voice 3: the applications and bring up stuff do i need to withdraw that motion

[4:01:18] Voice 11: thank

[4:01:19] Voice 3: you oh the one that we tabled um

[4:01:23] Voice 11: yeah you can withdraw i guess yeah does

[4:01:25] Voice 11: it mean does it need to be withdrawn

[4:01:27] Voice 3: oh okay it wasn't seconded so it doesn't need to be withdrawn all right um can i just i was

[4:01:33] Voice 3: going to say i want to add my uh thanks and and i hope that um you know staff do get actively

[4:01:44] Voice 3: involved i know yesterday at regional planning services we just we were really reiterating

[4:01:50] Voice 3: The purpose and our hope and desire is that we get to proactive community planning and move away from reactive planning and that innovation and creativity are just so, so important.

[4:02:05] Voice 3: And I know back before pandemic, when I used to hold office hours there, I was always saying, you guys have a coffee room table and you sit around and you talk.

[4:02:15] Voice 3: you know we want to hear those ideas we want you thinking and thinking about solving our

[4:02:21] Voice 3: problems because you're here you're facing it you're seeing them and so that's the environment

[4:02:26] Voice 3: i hope we're creating is that you know we want those juicy crazy ideas because sometimes those

[4:02:32] Voice 3: are the best thank you uh marva so we have a new expense report today and no islands trust

[4:02:41] Voice 3: a conservancy report the expense report wasn't the ultimate uh we didn't have any no i meant

[4:02:47] Voice 1: individually yeah

[4:02:48] Voice 3: but it's still in the attachment today and um so our next meeting is uh right here

[4:02:55] Voice 3: on december 14th at 9 30 a.m and uh there's nothing further i'll call for adjournment

[4:03:03] Voice 3: well i i salute any opposed all right let's declare the meeting adjourned thank you very

[4:03:10] Voice 3: much everyone i think today was a really good day

Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 1 
November 16, 2023 
  
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Regular Meeting 
 
 
Date: Thursday, November 16, 2023 
  
Location: SD64 Learning Hub 
122 Rainbow Road, Salt Spring Island 
  
 
Members Present: 
 
 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
Jamie Harris, Local Trustee  
Laura Patrick, Local Trustee   
 
Staff Present: 
 
Chris Hutton, Regional Planning Manager (RPM) 
Louisa Garbo, Island Planner (Zoom) 
Anthony Fotino, Island Planner (Zoom) 
Chris Buchan, Planner 2 (Zoom) 
Charly Caproff, Planner 1 (Zoom) 
Rob Pingle, Legislative Clerk 
Sarah Shugar, Recorder 
 
Others Present: Gary  Holman,  Capital  Regional  District  (CRD)  Salt  Spring  Island  Electoral 
Area Director 
Earl   Rook, Capital   Regional   District   (CRD)   Salt   Spring   Island Local 
Community Commission (LCC) Chair 
Approximately 13 members of the public 
These minutes follow  the  order  of  the  agenda  although  the  sequence  may  have  varied. The  electronic 
meeting was live streamed and recorded. 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
 
Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. He welcomed everyone to a meeting of the 
Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust  Committee  and  introduced  himself,  the  Trustees  and  staff.  Chair 
Peterson humbly stated gratitude to live and work in Coast Salish First Nations territory. 
 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
 
 The following item was presented for inclusion in the agenda: 
 15.3 BC Legislative Assembly Bill 44 – Housing Statutes Amendment Act, 2023 
 
 By general consent, the agenda was adopted as amended. 
 
3. TOWN HALL AND QUESTIONS 
 
Chair Peterson opened the town hall at 9:34 a.m. 
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 2 
November 16, 2023 
  
Member  of  the  Housing Action  Program Task  Force  Yvonne  Saunders expressed  disappointment 
that  the  Housing  Action  Program  Task  Force  recommendations  have  not  been  acted  upon  and 
requested the LTC to make decisions on housing to help the housing situation on Salt Spring Island. 
 
4.  DELEGATIONS - None  
 
5. TRUSTEE REPORTS 
 
Trustee Patrick presented the following report:  
 Trustee   Patrick spoke   to   her   work   on   housing   initiatives   over   the   years   including   the 
Community Economic Sustainability Commission and as SSILTC Trustee. Bylaw 530 was initiated 
as a recommendation of the Housing Action Program Task Force to allow secondary suites and 
accessory dwelling units (ADU’s). The LTC asked staff to provide options for limiting the number 
of ADU’s and the only  method  for  limiting  numbers  presented  as  an  option  to  date  is map 
based. Many property owners want to be landlords and have positive experiences sharing their 
property; 
 The   Regional   Planning   Committee   endorsed   a   housing   toolkit   including new   mapping 
techniques to identify where additional housing should be located; 
 Working  with  the  Rural  Island  Economic  Partnership  Housing  Group  on  rural  island  housing 
programs. No islands within the Trust Area are not experiencing housing issues; 
 Trustee  Patrick  has  been  following  the progress  of  BC  Legislative  Assembly Bill  44 – Housing 
Statutes  Amendment  Act,  2023  and  raising  awareness  regarding the  impacts  of  Islands  Trust 
being exempted from section 481.3; 
 Trustee Patrick spoke to Adam Olsen’s speech in the legislature regarding Bill 44 and noted the 
following  quote “We are getting exactly the results of the system that we created and 
nurtured”;  
 Attended the Salt Spring Island Abattoir birthday celebration. 
 
6. CHAIR'S REPORT  
 
 Chair Peterson presented the following report: 
 Attended a Trust Programs Committee meeting regarding the Draft Trust Policy Statement and 
the Wildfire Prevention and mitigation Stewardship Program; 
 Attended a Financial Planning Committee meeting regarding 2024/25 draft budget; 
 The Governance  Committee is  making  progress  on  the recommendations  in  the  2022  Great 
Northern Management Consultants Islands Trust Governance Review Report; 
 The next Trust Council meeting will be held in December 5 to 7, 2023 in Victoria; 
 Attended  an  evening  Town  Hall  meeting  on  November  15,  2023  at  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Golf 
Course and noted Bill 44 was a topic of concern at the meeting; 
 The BC Legislative  Assembly gave  first  reading to Bill 35 – Short-Term Rental Accommodations 
Act  on  October  16,  2023  and  noted LTC’s will  have  the  option  to  opt  into  the  Provincial 
residents requirement for Short-Term Rental Accommodations.  
 
7. CRD DIRECTOR'S REPORT  
  
CRD Director Holman presented the following report: 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 3 
November 16, 2023 
  
 The Lady Minto Hospital Foundation is proceeding with renovations at  the Seabreeze that will 
include 17 units for healthcare workers; 
 The CRD  will  request  inclusion  in  the BC  Housing Secondary  Suite  Incentive  Program  and MLA 
Olsen has expressed support for SSI to be included as well; 
 The Province has  introduced  mandatory  Province-wide registry for STVR’s as part of Bill 35 – 
Short-Term Rental Accommodations Act and hired staff to monitor and enforce the regulations. 
The CRD will request Salt Spring Island to be included in the owner occupation provision of Bill 
35; 
 CRD staff will  present  a  Rural  Housing  Strategy  at  the  next CRD Board meeting and consider a 
dedicated coordinator  position and  CRD  secondary suite  incentives  program. CRD  Staff  will 
present  on  Rural  Housing  Strategy at  the  November  23,  2023  Local  Community  Commission 
(LCC) meeting including pre-development funds options for housing projects; 
 The CRD  will  initiate  an alternate  approval  process  for  an  85  million  dollar  Regional  Housing 
First Borrowing Bylaw for affordable housing. The CRD has met with the Province requesting BC 
Housing to match the 85 million on a 2:1 basis; 
 Gulf  Islands  Seniors  Residence  Association  (GISRA) will  apply  for  a  BC  Housing  Grant  Program 
for the Kings Lane property; 
 The  CRD  Drake  Road  property  has  been  leased  to BC  Housing for  a  60-year  team  and is 
committed to 28-unit supported housing development. Director Holman requested BC Housing 
to consider an encampment on the Drake Road property although BC Housing does not support 
encampments. Director Holman has asked local NGO’s to consider managing an encampment; 
 The Southern  Gulf Island Tourism Partnership receives a 2% “hotel tax” and is supporting  a 
Housing  Now  Program  that  matches  available  housing  with  people  seeking  housing. Director 
Holman is in discussions with the Housing Now Program and the LCC to see what the program 
will look like on Salt Spring Island; 
 The LCC has identified employee housing as the number one housing priority;   
 The  LCC  has  proposed  an alternate  approval  process for the Rainbow  Road  Indoor  Pool  repair 
project; 
 The LCC has proposed an alternate approval process for a dewatering facility for liquid waste; 
 A Salt Spring Island Food Summit will be held on November 26, 2023; 
 The  CRD  Board  approved  a  motion  to  request  a  staff  report  on  the  merits  of joining  a  class 
action suit against 5 major oil companies to address the economic impacts of climate change; 
 The CRD  draft  2024 budget increase  is  approximately  9.6%  and  the  main  drivers  of  the  tax 
increase are staff wages and salaries (4-5%), deficits from the COVID pandemic including parks 
and recreation  and  transit  budgets  and  operating  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Middle School  (Salt 
Spring Island Multi Space) building. 
 
 CRD Local Community Commission (LCC) Chair Rook presented the following report: 
 Acknowledged  members  of  the  public  for  their  support  for  housing  and  noted  the  LCC  is 
monitoring housing issues including Bill 44 and Short-term vacation rental regulations; 
 The LCC expressed support for Salt Spring Island to be included in the Speculation and Vacancy 
Tax; 
 CRD housing will present at the November 23, 2023 LCC meeting and encouraged everyone to 
attend; 
 The CRD Draft 2024 budget increase will be considered at the November 23, 2023 LCC meeting. 
A goal of  the  LCC is  to  sustain  existing  services  and  members  of  the  public  are  encouraged  to 
provide input at the meeting; 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 4 
November 16, 2023 
  
 LCC Commissioners hold office hours on Wednesdays 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the CRD office at 
108 – 121 McPhillips Avenue. 
 
8. PREVIOUS MEETINGS 
 
8.1 Draft Minutes of the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee  
 
 8.1.1  Draft Minutes of the October 12, 2023 SSI LTC Regular Meeting  
 
 By  general  consent, the  minutes  of October  12, 2023 Salt  Spring  Island  Local 
Trust Committee Regular meeting were adopted. 
 
8.2 Resolutions Without Meeting Report - None 
 
9. CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 9.1 M. Chandler to LTC - Dated 7 Oct 2023 - Regarding Rainwater Catchment Advocacy  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
9.2  C.  Schmah  to  LTC - Dated  10  Oct  2023 - Regarding  Saltspring  Island  Botanimed  Inc. 
Cultivation Licensing  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
 9.3  V. Watkins to LTC - Dated 12 Oct 2023 - Regarding Long-Term Rentals  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
9.4  Chair  Peterson  to  CRD  Parks  and  Recreation  Manager - Dated  23  Oct  2023 – Regarding 
Ganges Harbourwalk  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
9.5  Chair  Peterson  to  Gulf  Islands  Seniors  Residence  Association - Dated  24  Oct  2023 - 
Regarding BC Housing Community Housing Program  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
 9.6  Chair  Peterson  to  Salt  Spring  Island Fire  Protection  District - Dated  24  October  2023 
Regarding Committee liaison to District  
 
  The correspondence item was received. 
 
9.7  Chair  Peterson  to  Minister  Conroy - Dated  30  October  2023 - Regarding  Speculation  and 
Vacancy Tax 
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 5 
November 16, 2023 
  
By general consent, the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee requested staff to draft an 
email correcting the error in the letter to replace “Minister of Housing” with “Minister of 
Finance”. 
 
The correspondence item was received. 
 
9.8 A. Walter to LTC - Dated 6 Nov 2023 - Regarding Salt Spring Cannabis Cultivation Licensing 
 
 The correspondence item was received. 
 
10. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES 
 
 10.1  Follow-Up Action List dated November 2023 
  
The report was received. 
 
11. COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING- None 
 
12. PUBLIC HEARING – None 
 
The meeting recessed at 11:35 a.m. for a lunch break and reconvened at 12:10 p.m. 
 
13. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS 
 
 13.1 SS-ALR-2023.2 - J. Litke - 710 Cranberry Road, SSI    
 
Planner   Caproff   presented   a   staff   report   dated November   16,   2023   regarding an 
Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) Application for Non-Farm Use and Subdivision. 
 
A  Trustee  expressed  support  to  ask  the Agricultural  Advisory  Planning  Commission  (AAPC) 
to comment on whether it is good practice to protect farmland to be inclusive of split zoned 
areas surrounding the ALR portion of a property.  
 
SS-2023-132 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That  the  Salt  Spring  Island Local  Trust  Committee  refer  application  SS-ALR-2023.2 (710 
Cranberry  Road) to the  Agricultural Advisory  Planning  Committee  (AAPC) for  comment  on 
the application generally as well as specifically on the following aspects: 
a. The potential changes to existing drainage patterns with the creation of two bare land 
strata lots adjacent to ALR land on the property; 
b. The proposed common road access (“Common Property Access Route”) on ALR land for 
two bare land strata lots on non-ALR land; and 
c. Whether the Salt Spring Local Trust Committee should support the subdivision and non-
farm use application. 
  CARRIED 
 
  
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 6 
November 16, 2023 
  
 13.2  SS-DVP-2023.15 - R. Margetts - 351 Mountain Park Drive, SSI    
 
Planner   Caproff   presented   a   staff   report   dated   November   16,   2023   regarding   a 
development variance permit application to increase the maximum accessory building floor 
area  to  legalize an  existing  accessory  building, reduce  the  minimum  setback  from  the 
interior  side  lot  line  to  legalize  an  existing  accessory  structure  and  reduce  the  minimum 
setback from the natural boundary of the sea to legalize an existing accessory structure. 
 
Applicant Richard Margetts spoke to the application. 
 
SS-2023-133 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee approve application SS-DVP-2023.15 (351 
Mountain Park Drive). 
CARRIED 
 
 13.3  SS-DVP-2023.17 - T. Rissling - 2915 Fulford-Ganges Road, SSI  
 
Planner   Caproff   presented   a   staff   report   dated   November   16,   2023   regarding   a 
development  variance  permit  application  to  vary  the  minimum  distance  of  an  accessory 
building from another building on a lot. 
 
SS-2023-134 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust  Committee  approve  issuance  of  SS-DVP-2023.17 
(2915 Fulford-Ganges Road). 
CARRIED 
 
 13.4  SS-DVP-2023.9 - D. Miller - 2101 Fulford-Ganges Road, SSI  
 
Planner   Buchan presented   a   staff   report   dated   November   16,   2023   regarding a 
development  variance  permit  application for a frontage  waiver  and  request  for  two 
variances to address the final subdivision approval conditions. 
 
SS-2023-135 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee approve development variance permit SS-
DVP-2023.9 (2101 Fulford-Ganges Road).  
CARRIED 
 
SS-2023-136 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust  Committee,  with  reference  to  Section  512(2)  of the 
Local  Government  Act,  approve  the  frontage  relief  from  the  required 10  percent  to  3.74% 
percent for proposed Strata Lot 1 and 7.66% for proposed Strata Lot 2 as shown on the plan 
of  subdivision  in  Attachment  3  of  the  report  from  Planner  Buchan  dated  November  16, 
2023 (2101 Fulford-Ganges Road). 
CARRIED 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 7 
November 16, 2023 
  
 
 13.5  SS-DP-2023.9 - M. Ogilvie - Lot 2 Jackson Ave, SSI  
 
Planner   Buchan   presented   a   staff   report   dated   November   16,   2023   regarding   a 
Development  Permit  application  for  the  removal  of  vegetation  within  the  setback  area  in 
Development Permit Area 1 (DPA1) - Island Villages. 
 
SS-2023-137 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of Development Permit 
SS-DP-2023.9 (Lot 2 – Jackson Avenue). 
CARRIED 
Trustee Harris OPPOSED 
 
 13.6  SS-TUP-2023.1 - J. Halan-Harris - 130 Blackburn Road, SSI 
  
Planner  Buchan  presented  a staff  report  dated  November  16, 2023  regarding a  temporary 
use  permit for  a  dog  kennel  business  including  staff  accommodation  and  a  proposed 
campground. 
 
SS-2023-138 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust  Committee  deny  issuance of  Temporary  Use  Permit 
SS-TUP-2023.1 (130 Blackburn Road) and direct staff to close application SS-TUP-2023.1 for 
the following reasons: 
a. The  Salt  Spring  Island  Official  Community  Plan  Bylaw  No.  434  does  not  list  the 
Watershed  and  Islet Residential  designation  as  eligible  for  Temporary  Use  Permit 
Issuance; 
b. The  Watershed  policy  under  Section  B.8  Salt  Spring  Island  Official  Community  Plan 
Bylaw  No.  434  restricts any  further  development  than  what  is  permitted  by  current 
zoning; and 
c. There are a number of appropriately zoned properties located on Salt Spring Island that 
are suitable for the proposed kennel use. 
CARRIED 
 
14. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS    
 
 14.1  Official Community Plan and Ganges Village Planning  
 
Planner Garbo presented a staff report dated November 16, 2023 regarding a roadmap for 
three major   projects: Data   collection/analysis,   geospatial   mapping,   and   complete 
community growth modeling; the OCP/LUB process; and Ganges (Shiya’hwt/SYOW
̱
T) Village 
Area Plan. 
 
In discussion the following items were noted: 
 Request staff  to make modifications  to  the  scope to  have  a  phased  approach  and  add 
regular check-ins with the LTC prior to the public engagement process; 
 Identify easy wins during the process; 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 8 
November 16, 2023 
  
 The UBCM Complete  Communities  Grant would  fund  the  data  collection/analysis, 
geospatial mapping, and complete community growth modeling project. 
 
SS-2023-139 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the  Salt  Spring  Island Local  Trust  Committee  accept the  roadmap  for  the  three  major 
projects identified in this staff report. 
CARRIED 
SS-2023-140 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee request staff to proceed with the Request 
for  Proposal  process  to  carry  out  the  tasks  and  the  equity-centred  public  engagement 
program through a  phased  approach to  the  Scope  of  Services that  includes the  identified 
partners and  add  a  deliverable  confirming  the  scope  prior  to  public  engagement  for  LTC 
approval. 
CARRIED 
 
 14.2  Proposed Bylaw 530 - Accessory Dwelling Units  
 
RPM Hutton presented a staff report dated November 16, 2023 regarding proposed Bylaw 
No. 530 “Accessory Dwelling Units”. 
 
In discussion the following items were noted: 
 There  was  a  suggestion  to  consider  the  current  version  of  Bylaw  530  as  Bylaw  530 
“lite”; 
 There  was  a  suggestion  to  develop  a  spot  zoning  pilot  program  that  would  allow 
property owners to apply to be added to the Bylaw 530 map; 
 The  LTC  has  the  right  to  waive  public  hearings  for  applications  that  are in  alignment 
with the Salt Spring Island Official Community Plan. 
 
SS-2023-141 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That  the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust Committee request  staff  to prepare a  new  bylaw 
number replicating Bylaw 530 as presented in the staff report dated November 16, 2023.  
CARRIED 
 
SS-2023-142 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee request staff to look into whether Bylaw 
readings could be held at a Special Meeting or by Resolution Without Meeting. 
CARRIED 
 
SS-2023-143 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to develop a spot zoning pilot 
program for  Accessory  Dwelling  Units considering  criteria,  fees  and  potential  to  waive 
Public Hearings. 
CARRIED 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 9 
November 16, 2023 
  
 
15. NEW BUSINESS  
 
 15.1  Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 447  
 
Planner  Fotino  presented  a  staff report  dated  November  16,  2023  regarding  a  request  to 
discharge a housing agreement for a 10-unit affordable housing unit development. 
 
A  representatives of  the  applicant  Chris  Freeman,  Van  City and  William  Roberts  spoke to 
the  application  to  discharge  the 2010  Housing  Agreement  for  584  Rainbow  Road. It  was 
noted the property is being marketed for affordable housing projects and the BC Supreme 
Court will oversee the sale. 
 
SS-2023-144 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That   the   Salt   Spring   Island   Local   Trust   Committee   discharge   the   notice   of   housing 
agreement   from   the   property   at   584   Rainbow   Road,   (PID   015-854-698)   with   legal 
description  as Lot  A,  Section  2,  Range  1  East,  North  Salt  Spring  Island,  Cowichan  District, 
Plan 49990. 
CARRIED 
 
 15.2  Dust and Bones screening  
 
Chair Peterson presented an email dated October 11, 2023 regarding screening of the Dust 
and  Bones  movie. It  was  noted  the  movie  screening  was  organized  in  2020  and  did  not 
proceed due to the COVID- 19 pandemic and the movie is available online. 
 
15.3 BC Legislative Assembly Bill 44 – Housing Statutes Amendment Act, 2023 
 
SS-2023-145 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee request the Chair of the Salt Spring Local 
Trust  Committee to send a letter to the Minister of Housing and the Premier’s office 
requesting  that  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust  Area  be  included  in  Bill  44  as  if  it were  a 
Municipality  with  a  population  of  greater  than  10,000,  marked  with  high  importance  and 
urgent, no later than November 21, 2023. 
 CARRIED 
 
16. REPORTS 
 
 16.1  Policy and Standing Resolutions List  
 
The report was received. 
 
 16.2  Future Projects Report dated November 2023 
 
The report was received. 
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 10 
November 16, 2023 
  
 
 16.3   Active Projects Report dated November 2023   
 
  The report was received. 
 
 16.4  Applications with Status Report dated November 2023   
 
The report was received. 
 
 16.5  Expense Report - None 
 
 16.6 Islands Trust Conservancy Board Report – None 
 
17. CLOSED MEETING  
 
17.1 Motion to Close the Meeting 
 
SS-2023-146 
At  10:31  a.m., It  was  MOVED  and  SECONDED that the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust 
Committee close this meeting to the public subject to Community Charter Section 90 (1): (e) 
the  acquisition,  disposition  or  expropriation  of  land  or  improvements, if  the  council 
considers  that  disclosure  could  reasonably  be  expected  to  harm  the  interests  of  the 
municipality; and (f)   law  enforcement,  if  the   council  considers  that  disclosure   could 
reasonably  be  expected  to  harm  the  conduct  of  an  investigation  under  or enforcement  of 
an enactment; and that staff be invited to remain. 
CARRIED 
 
 17.2 Motion to Open the Meeting  
 
SS-2023-147 
At 11:32  a.m., It  was  MOVED  and  SECONDED that the  Salt  Spring  Island  Local  Trust 
Committee  re-open  this  meeting  to  the  public  subject to  Section  89  of  the  Community 
Charter. 
CARRIED 
 
 17.3  Rise and Report - None 
 
18. UPCOMING MEETINGS 
 
The next regular meeting of the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee is scheduled on December 
14,  2023 at 9:30  a.m. at  the  SD64 Learning  Hub,  122  Rainbow  Road. Please  see  the  meeting 
calendar  on  the  Islands  Trust website  at www.islandstrust.bc.ca for current  meeting  information 
and location. 
 
19. ADJOURNMENT 
 
 By general consent the meeting adjourned at 2:37 p.m. 
 

 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes ADOPTED 11 
November 16, 2023 
  
 
 
 
_________________________ 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
 
CERTIFIED CORRECT: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Sarah Shugar, Recorder