Gambier Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, November 26, 2024

[0:00:05] Trustee Luckham: All right. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[0:00:10] Trustee Luckham: regular meeting, November the 26th. There we go. Where's the year gone?

[0:00:18] Trustee Luckham: My name is Peter Luckham. I'm elected on Thetis Island. I'm the appointed chair of the Gambier

[0:00:24] Trustee Luckham: Keats Island Trust Area, known as the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee,

[0:00:31] Trustee Luckham: and uh honor and privilege to be able to be able to serve in that function just want to before i

[0:00:38] Trustee Luckham: go to the other trustees just want to acknowledge that uh we're working uh broadly across coast

[0:00:44] Trustee Luckham: salish territory i always take a look out my window here and out onto the uh the gary oak

[0:00:50] Trustee Luckham: ecosystem moss covered rocks that surround my house and uh that makes me recall that

[0:00:58] Trustee Luckham: that these islands were places of indigenous lives,

[0:01:04] Trustee Luckham: culture, harvesting, joy and happiness,

[0:01:10] Trustee Luckham: and colonialism came along and disrupted a number of things,

[0:01:15] Trustee Luckham: which we're all working through today

[0:01:17] Trustee Luckham: to try and make the world a better place.

[0:01:21] Trustee Luckham: And I'm grateful to have those opportunities to know that

[0:01:24] Trustee Luckham: and reflect that and do that work.

[0:01:26] Trustee Luckham: um trustee stanford over to you for

[0:01:32] Trustee Stamford: a trustee report i think i'm gonna wait just

[0:01:35] Trustee Luckham: a opening

[0:01:36] Trustee Luckham: remark if you have any otherwise sorry

[0:01:38] Trustee Luckham: that's all right

[0:01:39] Trustee Stamford: um saying hi from child knowledge

[0:01:43] Trustee Stamford: in al-qaeda somehow sound a beautiful calm sunny day great good

[0:01:50] Trustee Luckham: morning and joe bernardo

[0:01:52] Trustee Luckham: opening remark and then we'll move to oh

[0:01:54] Voice 5: well yes just uh following in with the spirit of my

[0:01:57] Voice 5: my colleague here. Greetings to everybody and anybody who happens to be viewing. And

[0:02:05] Voice 5: although I'm not in Lictines, also known as Keats Island at the moment, that's where I hail from for

[0:02:13] Voice 5: the purpose of the Islands Trust. And we're here to do work for Gambier, the Gambier Local Trust

[0:02:20] Voice 5: Area. Thank you. Perfect.

[0:02:22] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Good morning and welcome to both of you. So on the staff side,

[0:02:25] Trustee Luckham: we have Planner Marlis McCarger. Good morning, Marlis. Thank you for joining us and all the

[0:02:31] Trustee Luckham: reporting and work that you've done for us. And Ian Cox, good morning, sir. And I thank you also

[0:02:36] Trustee Luckham: for all of your work on today's agenda. And Lisa Millard, running our electronics and our minutes

[0:02:43] Trustee Luckham: and everything, Zoom meetings, I am very grateful to you also. So I'll just call the meeting to

[0:02:50] Trustee Luckham: to order and approve the agenda, I'll ask if there's anything, there is an addendum

[0:02:56] Trustee Luckham: which came to you in a separate package. And so please note that. And I'll ask if there's

[0:03:05] Trustee Luckham: anything else to add to the day's agenda. Okay, then let's adopt the agenda then as presented

[0:03:15] Trustee Luckham: with the addendum and i don't have that i that uh section number with me but it must be 8.3 i think

[0:03:27] Trustee Luckham: what's that and that's some covenants to some oh the addendum

[0:03:31] Trustee Stamford: yeah yeah

[0:03:32] Trustee Luckham: all right then so uh

[0:03:34] Trustee Luckham: trustee reports um let's um go with uh joe bernardo and then perhaps we'll go then we'll go

[0:03:41] Trustee Luckham: to you kate and you may as well just slide into your electoral area director's report as well and

[0:03:47] Trustee Luckham: and I'll follow up with a chair report.

[0:03:49] Trustee Luckham: Over to you, Joe.

[0:03:50] Voice 5: I'll be brief.

[0:03:51] Voice 5: In my capacity as trustee for, you know, the narrow capacity as a trustee

[0:03:58] Voice 5: in my local trust committee capacity, there really aren't any developments

[0:04:02] Voice 5: other than what we dealt with at the last meeting,

[0:04:05] Voice 5: and that's typically how it works.

[0:04:06] Voice 5: I mean, it goes from meeting to meeting,

[0:04:08] Voice 5: and there's nothing really new in that respect in between

[0:04:11] Voice 5: except in exceptional circumstances.

[0:04:13] Voice 5: census. In my capacity as chair of the Financial Planning Committee, I can report that I think

[0:04:22] Voice 5: we're making good progress this year. And it's hard to put my finger on it to describe why I'm

[0:04:31] Voice 5: saying that. But the process seems to be working a little bit better. For that, I think I want to

[0:04:37] Voice 5: give credit, I need to give credit to interim CEO Mobs, who's our director of finance, really. And

[0:04:43] Voice 5: And she's just introducing a number of little tweaks here and there that are allowing our meetings to proceed in a more efficient fashion and in a more structured fashion.

[0:04:55] Voice 5: And so she's working with her.

[0:04:57] Voice 5: We, you know, we're managing to get ourselves forward to more structured decision making.

[0:05:03] Voice 5: And with the introduction of budget guidelines, which is an innovation over and above principles that we've used before, that seems to have helped both the committees and the staff in terms of sharpening up their presentations.

[0:05:20] Voice 5: So that's helpful.

[0:05:22] Voice 5: Meanwhile, you know, there's other things I could report on, but they're all things that are happening at the trust council level.

[0:05:32] Voice 5: they're not particularly relevant to Gambier so I'll just let that go thank you okay thank you

[0:05:40] Trustee Luckham: Joe okay Louise Stanford over to you thank

[0:05:44] Trustee Stamford: you I think I'll just do my director's report because

[0:05:48] Trustee Stamford: there's just island stuff in there so I yesterday was round beginning of round one budget

[0:05:57] Trustee Stamford: budget for the regional district. So it was eight to five going through the process. This

[0:06:05] Trustee Stamford: is our first year using a corporate plan. And it's an iterative process as we build

[0:06:13] Trustee Stamford: in new processes and concepts trying to make a very, very complex decision making matrix

[0:06:21] Trustee Stamford: matrix work in terms of primarily what our big challenges is being staffing and and there's just

[0:06:33] Trustee Stamford: so many projects that are on the books and how do we get them done without multiple increases of

[0:06:40] Trustee Stamford: staff so that's sort of our focus as much as keeping the budget down so one of the highlights

[0:06:48] Trustee Stamford: Highlights for Keats, we passed for going into round two

[0:06:53] Trustee Stamford: is another $268,000 for Keats Landing dock.

[0:06:59] Trustee Stamford: We had done the engineering reports for Keats Landing

[0:07:02] Trustee Stamford: and the costing for the fix is now going into next year's budget.

[0:07:08] Trustee Stamford: And that's just one of the nine docks.

[0:07:11] Trustee Stamford: um so yeah there's got to be some review of of how to deal with the expenses of the the docks

[0:07:21] Trustee Stamford: in this area um it also was passed so far is the new brighton feasibility study and that's a process

[0:07:30] Trustee Stamford: of how taxation would work if um the new brighton dock was was um became part of the regional

[0:07:38] Trustee Stamford: district um it was announced yesterday that uh bc ferries is dismantling the uh facs the ferry

[0:07:46] Trustee Stamford: advisory committees um i i think that has some impact on the larger routes i'm on route three

[0:07:55] Trustee Stamford: fac fac i i can see it working without personally i can see it working without a a fac route three

[0:08:03] Trustee Stamford: but route 13 um and i'm sure the other island routes where you're working with

[0:08:09] Trustee Stamford: you know schedules every few months trying to make it work for everyone i think there's got

[0:08:15] Trustee Stamford: to be some other mechanism brought in quite quickly to support the the smaller island routes

[0:08:21] Trustee Stamford: um on october 25th i co-hosted the house on community forum with as part of the sunshine

[0:08:30] Trustee Stamford: Coast Regional District. We were at the YMCA camp just past Langdale. It was a really well

[0:08:38] Trustee Stamford: attended event. Part of the attendance focus was the fact that many, many of the elected people

[0:08:48] Trustee Stamford: around the table were former counselors or attendees of that particular camp. It's a big

[0:08:54] Trustee Stamford: 110 year old camp and uh lots of people connect their history with the sunshine coast

[0:09:00] Trustee Stamford: with that particular one um apart from all the electeds from whistler through to west van bowen

[0:09:08] Trustee Stamford: sunshine coast we had um mp patrick weiler and we also had the two new mlas um

[0:09:16] Trustee Stamford: um for the area and our new MLA Randy Neal is now the Minister of Waterlands and

[0:09:23] Trustee Stamford: Resources so that is a big feather in our cap and we're looking forward to working with her

[0:09:32] Trustee Stamford: um the SCRD has already put together an advocacy letter to the new provincial government with our

[0:09:39] Trustee Stamford: priorities, and that will be going out shortly. October 26th, I hosted a workshop for the

[0:09:50] Trustee Stamford: southwest peninsula of Gambier, and it was a discussion about how taxes work. It included

[0:09:55] Trustee Stamford: Islands Trust taxes, how that's all apportioned out, and then a regional district, how that works.

[0:10:03] Trustee Stamford: It works very differently from Islands Trust taxation, and it was primarily focused on

[0:10:08] Trustee Stamford: on the dock issue, as well as options for New Brighton dock.

[0:10:13] Trustee Stamford: That was very well appreciated, the attendance on that,

[0:10:17] Trustee Stamford: and also ongoing discussions with the community

[0:10:21] Trustee Stamford: to come up with ideas of how to help ourselves with that.

[0:10:25] Trustee Stamford: And finally, I just wanna note,

[0:10:26] Trustee Stamford: and I'm not sure how Keats is doing,

[0:10:28] Trustee Stamford: but TELUS has been off since November 4th here.

[0:10:33] Trustee Stamford: Landlines are not working,

[0:10:35] Trustee Stamford: and we do have quite spotty cell service here so we're quite concerned and we're looking to

[0:10:42] Trustee Stamford: advocate for getting our telephones turned back on um do you know if you've got landline service

[0:10:50] Trustee Stamford: on keats trustee bernard i

[0:10:52] Voice 5: don't um i don't have landline service over there but i i do

[0:10:57] Voice 5: know people who do the difficulty is um i think uh there's a lot of people who've shut down their

[0:11:06] Voice 5: their cabins for the season already yeah and so yeah

[0:11:08] Voice 4: they would not get

[0:11:09] Voice 5: any inputs i might

[0:11:10] Voice 5: otherwise get but to cut to the chase i haven't heard anything about that particular issue about

[0:11:16] Voice 5: okay yeah so we're working on that that doesn't say it's not fair i just haven't heard it

[0:11:22] Trustee Stamford: no it's

[0:11:23] Trustee Stamford: fine i'm just trying to get a sense of how far this outage is um because we're everyone is out

[0:11:30] Trustee Stamford: on Gambier and we're just not getting any luck having it restored right now so any questions

[0:11:38] Trustee Stamford: about my report if

[0:11:42] Voice 5: I may share no questions but I would appreciate it if on behalf of the trust

[0:11:50] Voice 5: committee you could just convey the appreciation of the trust committee and certainly Keats Island

[0:11:56] Voice 5: residents for the uh voting of the over quarter million dollars to to repair the dock you know

[0:12:02] Voice 5: uh that's very helpful uh and uh just want srd to uh hear us saying thank you because

[0:12:10] Voice 5: we appreciate

[0:12:11] Trustee Stamford: it yeah and it's it's necessary and it's also there's other things happening you know

[0:12:17] Trustee Stamford: the parks need attention on keys um and oh no thing i did forget is um we're in the process

[0:12:25] Trustee Stamford: of beginning our our search for a new chief executive officer so we'll we're on that too now

[0:12:35] Trustee Stamford: so that's that's being put out but yeah i appreciate it i will let the

[0:12:39] Trustee Stamford: peter

[0:12:40] Voice 5: and i are peter and i were both on the hiring committee and

[0:12:43] Voice 5: you have our compassion i think good luck yeah

[0:12:48] Trustee Stamford: yeah

[0:12:49] Voice 5: yeah yeah

[0:12:51] Trustee Luckham: and we i'll just say we were served very well by um leaders international

[0:12:56] Trustee Luckham: the recruiter okay

[0:12:58] Trustee Stamford: yeah we looked at those yeah we're going with tall cedars as a smaller okay

[0:13:04] Trustee Luckham: great more local group yeah great okay um okay thank you for your report yeah 250 000 for the

[0:13:14] Trustee Luckham: docs on keats i thank you joe for acknowledging that that is significant and um kate louise

[0:13:20] Trustee Luckham: thank you for your contribution to ensuring that that is covered. From my area report,

[0:13:31] Trustee Luckham: nothing specific to report on Gambier Keats. I enjoy observing what's going on there. Landline

[0:13:40] Trustee Luckham: access has also been a problem elsewhere. And of course, we know that TELUS, as they roll out

[0:13:46] Trustee Luckham: fiber is less and less interested in copper wires. So I'll just say from a broader federation wide

[0:13:55] Trustee Luckham: in my role as the chair, yesterday was the first day of the new CAO at the Allen's Trust and we

[0:14:02] Trustee Luckham: welcomed him to the offices. He's fully engaged for the entire week in orientation with staff

[0:14:10] Trustee Luckham: staff. And I actually attended to welcome him to the office, just a symbolic gesture, welcoming

[0:14:19] Trustee Luckham: him. I think I always welcome people into my own home. And I also think of the Honest Trust as part

[0:14:26] Trustee Luckham: of my home. And so I traveled down just to do that. But most significantly, also, I took that

[0:14:33] Trustee Luckham: opportunity to thank Julia Mobs as the interim CEO, as she hands off the reins to the incoming

[0:14:38] Trustee Luckham: coming CAO, because indeed wearing numerous hats with numerous pressures managed to keep our ship

[0:14:47] Trustee Luckham: on course. And as Joe has indicated, some improvements with how we're doing things.

[0:14:53] Trustee Luckham: We are, of course, preparing for Islands Trust Council in Victoria next week. And there's a

[0:15:02] Trustee Luckham: a full agenda there, lots to talk about with policy statements and budget and meeting procedures

[0:15:11] Trustee Luckham: and behaviors, all sorts of things. And so looking forward to that opportunity, certainly

[0:15:17] Trustee Luckham: we're going to do the best we can with everything that's brought to our attention through that

[0:15:22] Trustee Luckham: meeting agenda. I think that concludes my report. We're going to go here to public comment

[0:15:32] Trustee Luckham: And I'm looking at the participants list. I see a number of people have joined us as attendees. I'm assuming a few of those folks are applicants, which are on our agenda today.

[0:15:48] Trustee Luckham: And I'll just say that applicants have the opportunity to speak to the application when we get to that section.

[0:15:57] Trustee Luckham: section. I will be asking you if you concur with the recommendations in the report, and then we

[0:16:04] Trustee Luckham: may have some questions for you. But coming back to public comment period, so therefore, is there

[0:16:09] Trustee Luckham: anybody that wishes to address the local trust committee today about other matters? I'll just

[0:16:14] Trustee Luckham: give a bit of a warning. We are post-public hearing on bylaws number 153 and 154, and we

[0:16:22] Trustee Luckham: We are cautious about receiving new information.

[0:16:25] Trustee Luckham: And so in that precautious approach, not particularly wanting to hear what may jeopardize the process as new information in the public comment period.

[0:16:39] Trustee Luckham: So that said, excluding bylaw 153, 154, is there anybody that wishes to address the local trust committee?

[0:16:48] Trustee Luckham: perhaps if that's possible, Lisa, I don't see any indication of hands up or anything there,

[0:16:54] Trustee Luckham: perhaps you do or not. So Lisa, did you copy that?

[0:17:12] Voice 3: Chair Luckham, I also do not see any members of

[0:17:16] Voice 3: the public with raised hands wishing to speak.

[0:17:19] Trustee Luckham: Okay, very good. So thank you very much. So we'll

[0:17:21] Trustee Luckham: proceed then through the agenda to 5.1, local trust committee meeting dated October the 1st.

[0:17:28] Trustee Luckham: these are our minutes um for that last meeting um are there any amendments to those minutes uh

[0:17:34] Trustee Luckham: trustees no no all right then i'm going to take it then that by general consent we adopt the minutes

[0:17:44] Trustee Luckham: of october the 1st 2024 as presented and thank you very much lisa for looking after that we have

[0:17:51] Trustee Luckham: nothing in the the next two standing items the resolution without meeting or advisory planning

[0:17:56] Trustee Luckham: and commission minutes um and that brings us directly to the follow-up action list of november

[0:18:02] Trustee Luckham: the 19th oh we

[0:18:05] Trustee Stamford: we were supposed to have um apc minutes um but the meeting was um cancelled due

[0:18:14] Trustee Stamford: to power outages so that's going to be rescheduled till

[0:18:18] Trustee Luckham: december okay so uh i see marlis you've

[0:18:22] Trustee Luckham: jumped in there do you have some remarks associated with the minutes no

[0:18:28] Planner McCargar: sorry i just

[0:18:29] Planner McCargar: didn't was wondering if there was going to be a question on the fuel okay

[0:18:32] Trustee Luckham: um so yeah indeed so

[0:18:34] Trustee Luckham: the follow-up action list um i'm presuming that it's up to date and i'll just ask if there's

[0:18:40] Trustee Luckham: trustees that have any questions about any items on the follow-up action list otherwise we will

[0:18:45] Trustee Luckham: receive it for information. Any questions?

[0:18:50] Voice 4: No. Okay.

[0:18:52] Trustee Luckham: So no delegations today. And this brings

[0:18:57] Trustee Luckham: us directly to the business at hand, which is applications and referrals. We have the first

[0:19:05] Trustee Luckham: one at 8.1, the Gambier Development Variance Permit 2023.4. That's on page 16 of our package.

[0:19:14] Trustee Luckham: I'm just gonna make sure I've got that up here.

[0:19:18] Trustee Luckham: Okay, page 16.

[0:19:20] Trustee Luckham: And the applicant is Annie Lalonde.

[0:19:24] Trustee Luckham: And I think I see that person in the audience there.

[0:19:29] Trustee Luckham: Yes, I do.

[0:19:30] Trustee Luckham: And so thank you for joining us, Annie.

[0:19:34] Trustee Luckham: And we're gonna receive a staff report

[0:19:38] Trustee Luckham: that's in the package, a summary.

[0:19:41] Trustee Luckham: and then we'll come to you to ask you if you concur with the reports or have any additional

[0:19:48] Trustee Luckham: information you would like to provide to us. And then we'll have a conversation amongst the

[0:19:53] Trustee Luckham: trustees and we may ask you and staff some questions with respect to the report and the

[0:19:58] Trustee Luckham: application. So I'm going to turn to Planner McCargar to introduce, summarize the development

[0:20:06] Trustee Luckham: and variance permit over to you great

[0:20:08] Planner McCargar: good morning everyone um so the applicant seeks

[0:20:11] Planner McCargar: retroactive approval for a variance to reduce the setback for the existing dwelling

[0:20:16] Planner McCargar: and deck on gambier island the recommendation from staff is to approve the dvp to reduce the

[0:20:24] Planner McCargar: setback from the natural boundary of the sea from 15 meters to 10.10 meters for the existing

[0:20:32] Planner McCargar: single-family dwelling, but staff are not recommending approval of the deck variance.

[0:20:40] Planner McCargar: So the application follows a bylaw enforcement issue regarding an unlawful siting of the dwelling

[0:20:45] Planner McCargar: and deck. No building permits exist for either structure. The existing structures do not meet

[0:20:51] Planner McCargar: setback regulations as per the Gambier Island Land Use Bylaw, and a portion of the deck extends

[0:20:58] Planner McCargar: ends beyond the property boundary and into the foreshore. So for the deck, there's some

[0:21:04] Planner McCargar: uncertainty regarding the deck's impact on the natural coastal processes. Request for the deck

[0:21:11] Planner McCargar: to be legalized requires crown foreshore tenure and possible rezoning. Staff would recommend

[0:21:17] Planner McCargar: further assessment by a coastal engineer to determine potential environmental impacts before

[0:21:23] Planner McCargar: considering this variance. For the single-family dwelling, the property is steep beyond the 15

[0:21:30] Planner McCargar: meter setback, making relocation of the dwelling impractical. No negative impact associated on

[0:21:36] Planner McCargar: surrounding properties as the dwelling fits within the character of the area. There is a

[0:21:43] Planner McCargar: geotechnical study from 2006 that was included as part of your package as one of the covenants

[0:21:50] Planner McCargar: and that recommend that study recommends a seven and a half meter setback from the natural boundary

[0:21:56] Planner McCargar: of the sea was attachment eight the subject property was created as part of a subdivision

[0:22:02] Planner McCargar: in 2007 but building sites were not required to meet the land use bylaw setback requirements at

[0:22:09] Planner McCargar: that time so due to the property's topography achieving the 15 meter setback is not feasible

[0:22:16] Planner McCargar: The geotech study from 2006 suggested that a seven and a half meter setback, considering site constraints, would be suitable.

[0:22:26] Planner McCargar: So just to conclude, staff are recommending approval for the variance for the dwelling setback, but not for the variance for the deck.

[0:22:34] Planner McCargar: Further steps would be needed for deck legalization, including crown tenure and possible rezoning.

[0:22:46] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Thank you, Plan McCarger, for your summary there. And so I'll just turn briefly to the

[0:22:53] Trustee Luckham: applicant, Annie Lalande. If you'd like to unmute your microphone and you have any remarks you'd

[0:23:00] Trustee Luckham: like to make to us with respect to the report, and then we'll have a conversation here. Over to you.

[0:23:12] Voice 2: Maybe I can leave the floor to Emily Yosh, who's the co-applicant and who is the owner

[0:23:17] Voice 2: of the property, and I've been helping with the application.

[0:23:20] Voice 2: I don't know, Emily, if there's anything that you want to add.

[0:23:22] Trustee Luckham: Yeah, I'm having a hard time hearing you.

[0:23:24] Trustee Luckham: The audio here seems quiet today, and yours is particularly quiet.

[0:23:29] Trustee Luckham: Perhaps you could restate that and just speak up a little bit.

[0:23:34] Voice 2: Oh, I was simply indicating that Emily Yost is the co-applicant on this application,

[0:23:39] Voice 2: so I'll turn it over to her as the owner of the land, as I've been assisting with procedures.

[0:23:44] Trustee Luckham: Oh, I see.

[0:23:45] Trustee Luckham: Okay, that's fine.

[0:23:46] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:23:47] Trustee Luckham: Great.

[0:23:48] Voice 8: Thank you.

[0:23:49] Voice 8: Thank you, everyone.

[0:23:50] Voice 8: Good morning.

[0:23:51] Voice 8: thank you for letting us comment on this application and for reviewing it so thoroughly

[0:23:54] Voice 8: and my apologies for the delay in transmitting the documents and really thank you for supporting us

[0:24:01] Voice 8: my only two comments are that for the small single family dwelling we initially as was mentioned used

[0:24:10] Voice 8: the old survey that was provided to us by the previous owners of the land and did not think

[0:24:16] Voice 8: of redoing a survey. So probably that is on us. We also initially were planning to build an eight

[0:24:22] Voice 8: by 10 cabin, which turned out to be a little bit bigger as we grew our family. So also something

[0:24:28] Voice 8: that we potentially should have considered in the planning of building of our single family

[0:24:34] Voice 8: cabin. So that's for the cabin. In terms of the deck, when I bought the property, the deck was

[0:24:40] Voice 8: was already there. I was under the false assumption that this was potentially grandfathered in, but

[0:24:47] Voice 8: I hear that it's not. And therefore, I accept the need for further evaluations, especially by

[0:24:55] Voice 8: coastal engineers in terms of reassessing the presence of the deck. Of course, it is a matter

[0:25:00] Voice 8: of safety also. This is the only way that we can access the dock. And so we need to find a way to

[0:25:06] Voice 8: still be able to transfer from the dock to the rest of the property in a safe way over the rocky

[0:25:15] Voice 8: shore. So we're looking forward to having your inputs and opportunities to discuss further this

[0:25:22] Voice 8: matter. And again, thank you for hearing us today.

[0:25:25] Trustee Luckham: Okay, well, thank you for sharing that

[0:25:29] Trustee Luckham: information with us. Appreciate it. So I'm going to come to trustees now and ask you how you would

[0:25:36] Trustee Luckham: would like to proceed with the development variance permit and Kate Louise Stanford I see

[0:25:42] Trustee Luckham: your hand up over to you I

[0:25:45] Trustee Stamford: just have a couple of questions of clarification through to staff

[0:25:48] Trustee Stamford: right now um how um usual is it for a subdivision to be okayed in um in without being in compliance

[0:26:04] Trustee Stamford: compliance with the local bylaws. For instance, they haven't been required to fit within the 15

[0:26:11] Trustee Stamford: meter setback or to go outside the 15 meter setback. They were permitted to go to 7.5.

[0:26:19] Trustee Stamford: That was the recommendation. How common do we get subdivisions with that kind of stipulation?

[0:26:25] Trustee Stamford: Is it specifically just because of the geology of that area?

[0:26:30] Trustee Stamford: So

[0:26:32] Planner McCargar: through the chair, it wasn't that the subdivision was approved with a seven and a half meter setback. It was just that when the subdivision was approved, the building sites were not indicated on the subdivision layout, which they often wouldn't be.

[0:26:47] Planner McCargar: um but it was all and then it was also accompanied by this geotechnical study that that recommended

[0:26:54] Planner McCargar: that a seven and a half meter setback would be sufficient but it wasn't approved with with that

[0:27:00] Planner McCargar: so there was no they were still anyone who would build on those subdivision sites were still

[0:27:05] Planner McCargar: required to follow the the land use bylaw and that would be the 15 meter setback

[0:27:10] Trustee Stamford: okay and my second

[0:27:13] Trustee Stamford: Second question would be around next steps around how to legalize the deck.

[0:27:22] Trustee Stamford: Because to me, it is a safety issue, more so than a natural processes issue.

[0:27:32] Trustee Stamford: If that is the only way they get onto the property, I see they've got a very steep potential driveway.

[0:27:38] Trustee Stamford: way i don't i i know the area so i know how steep it is in there and potentially how dangerous it

[0:27:44] Trustee Stamford: can be um so um it doesn't sound like we have the authority to do anything at this point but

[0:27:53] Trustee Stamford: what would be the steps for the applicant to start moving forward to get that deck legalized

[0:28:01] Planner McCargar: yeah so the one of the main issues is that a portion of the deck is not on their property

[0:28:05] Planner McCargar: So that would require, if they wanted to keep the deck as the same footprint that it currently has, it would require a rezoning of that foreshore area and it would require crown tenure approval.

[0:28:18] Planner McCargar: So that's something that's completely separate from us.

[0:28:21] Planner McCargar: And then it would also require the variance.

[0:28:23] Planner McCargar: So it would be a very lengthy and, you know, possibly complicated and with an uncertain outcome for that process.

[0:28:33] Planner McCargar: if they wanted to adjust the size of the deck so that it was completely on their property

[0:28:40] Planner McCargar: and then apply for a variance a zero meter setback variance that would be a simpler process perhaps

[0:28:48] Planner McCargar: okay

[0:28:50] Trustee Stamford: those are my questions for clarification right now okay thank

[0:28:54] Trustee Luckham: you joe do you have anything

[0:28:56] Voice 5: sorry uh no i don't have any questions thank you yeah

[0:29:00] Trustee Luckham: okay um so thank you for your

[0:29:03] Trustee Luckham: Another question there, Kate, I think that was important to know, is there is a path forward for retaining the, actually the ramp, I think is probably the most significant part of that.

[0:29:17] Voice 4: Of the deck, yeah.

[0:29:18] Trustee Luckham: And indeed, the alteration to that deck landing would be, in my mind, the most positive way to move forward, and you'd have to reapply.

[0:29:30] Trustee Luckham: But of course, you would need to get the foreshore lease and all that stuff, which I don't anticipate would be an issue.

[0:29:40] Trustee Luckham: We're not necessarily telling you to tear the dock down at this juncture.

[0:29:43] Trustee Luckham: you have would have some opportunity to regroup yourself and come back to us and approach the

[0:29:51] Trustee Luckham: ministry accordingly so i'm satisfied with the report and the recommendation in the report

[0:29:57] Trustee Luckham: and i do see emily your hand

[0:30:00] Trustee Luckham: is up there did you have something else to add we don't usually continue the discussion with

[0:30:04] Trustee Luckham: the applicants once we've provided your opportunity but okay

[0:30:08] Voice 8: well thank you so much i just had a

[0:30:10] Voice 8: follow-up question but i guess i can address it with the the team later on about the deck if

[0:30:14] Voice 8: yeah

[0:30:15] Trustee Luckham: yeah work with the

[0:30:16] Trustee Luckham: staff they'll help i

[0:30:17] Voice 8: will do that

[0:30:18] Trustee Luckham: where you need to be

[0:30:19] Voice 8: amazing thank you so

[0:30:20] Voice 8: much all right so um

[0:30:22] Trustee Luckham: would you like uh trustees would you like to make a motion yeah

[0:30:26] Trustee Stamford: and i i'm

[0:30:27] Trustee Stamford: I'm going to make the recommendation on page 16, but I do want to add that I noticed also there's no building permits here, and that won't be another thing to take care of.

[0:30:38] Trustee Stamford: It would have all come out at the building permit process to have seen those kind of issues, and then you wouldn't be able to get the survey, and it all would have shown.

[0:30:50] Trustee Stamford: own. So I'm going to move that the Gambarine Local Trust Committee approve issuance of

[0:30:55] Trustee Stamford: development variance permit GMDVP 2023.4 to reduce the minimum setback to the natural

[0:31:02] Trustee Stamford: boundary of the sea from 15 meters to 10.10 meters to allow sighting of an existing single

[0:31:08] Trustee Stamford: family dwelling.

[0:31:11] Trustee Luckham: I second the motion. Thank you, Joe. So that's moved and seconded. Is there any

[0:31:15] Trustee Luckham: further discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor please raise your hands electronically

[0:31:21] Trustee Luckham: or physically and that carries unanimously and um so thank you for that so is there any further

[0:31:26] Trustee Luckham: business um with respect to this uh application no okay so there you go um you will uh staff will

[0:31:34] Trustee Luckham: provide you the development permit for the cabin and you'll have conversations with that with them

[0:31:39] Trustee Luckham: regarding the next steps for you so thank you for joining us today thank

[0:31:43] Voice 8: you have a good day thank

[0:31:45] Voice 8: you very much yeah

[0:31:46] Trustee Luckham: so our next item then is uh gambier development variance permit 2023.2

[0:31:53] Trustee Luckham: and gambier development permit 2023.1 delaney and humming and i think there was a note there

[0:32:02] Trustee Luckham: that the applicant wasn't with us yet has that been resolved uh man planner cox it looks like

[0:32:07] Trustee Luckham: this is your file

[0:32:08] Voice 7: yes yeah the applicant uh um mr delane stephen delane is with us

[0:32:14] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[0:32:14] Trustee Luckham: So just for the applicant's benefit then,

[0:32:17] Trustee Luckham: we're going to receive the staff report summary from Planner Cox,

[0:32:21] Trustee Luckham: and then there'll be an opportunity for you to speak to the report,

[0:32:25] Trustee Luckham: if you concur with it or not,

[0:32:27] Trustee Luckham: and any information you'd like to share with the LTC

[0:32:31] Trustee Luckham: in assisting it with its decision.

[0:32:33] Trustee Luckham: And then we'll have a discussion at the LTC table, virtual table,

[0:32:37] Trustee Luckham: and we may have some questions for you.

[0:32:39] Trustee Luckham: So over to Planner Cox for his report.

[0:32:43] Voice 7: okay thank you chair so you have a report in front of you um it's for um well uh it's a 0.8

[0:32:52] Voice 7: acre ish lot on on west bay road and the development is all within the dpa3 riparian areas

[0:33:00] Voice 7: dpa so primarily this is now a development permit application i'll just preface the whole

[0:33:08] Voice 7: spiel by saying that the applicant has withdrawn their request for the variances

[0:33:13] Voice 7: Since the notice came out, their plans have changed.

[0:33:16] Voice 7: And so as you see in the original site plan survey, most of those buildings are no longer in consideration here.

[0:33:27] Voice 7: It's just the draft development permit, as you see it, in the attachment with the site plan that is in the repairing area regulation report.

[0:33:37] Voice 7: So the wrapper report there.

[0:33:40] Voice 7: So what

[0:33:41] Trustee Stamford: page is that?

[0:33:43] Voice 7: clarify it is the attachment is in second attachment number seven proposed dp okay

[0:33:55] Trustee Stamford: okay

[0:33:56] Voice 7: so um so again just for clarification the applicant's just requesting the dp

[0:34:03] Voice 7: in conformance with the wrapper report that's been provided by cascade environmental

[0:34:09] Voice 7: environmental no longer requesting withdrawing uh the request for the variances because of the

[0:34:15] Voice 7: change in plans since the notification so um

[0:34:18] Trustee Luckham: sorry uh ian just want to be clear that i kind of heard

[0:34:22] Trustee Luckham: two separate things so the applicant has withdrawn gambier development variance permit 2023.2 at this

[0:34:28] Trustee Luckham: time

[0:34:28] Voice 7: correct this is a combined report which was originally for the dvp and the dp and they

[0:34:35] Voice 7: they're withdrawing their request for the variances, yes.

[0:34:38] Voice 7: Okay, perfect.

[0:34:39] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:34:39] Trustee Luckham: That makes it easier.

[0:34:41] Voice 7: Yeah.

[0:34:41] Voice 7: So this really, I mean, the LTC could, you know,

[0:34:47] Voice 7: formally deny the permit, but I think that on process,

[0:34:50] Voice 7: it would be fine just to have it noted in the minutes

[0:34:53] Voice 7: that they've withdrawn their request,

[0:34:55] Voice 7: and then the LTC can just consider the DP.

[0:34:58] Voice 7: Does that make sense?

[0:34:59] Trustee Stamford: Sorry, Planner Cox.

[0:35:00] Trustee Luckham: There are refundable costs if it's just withdrawn

[0:35:03] Trustee Luckham: as opposed to being denied,

[0:35:04] Trustee Luckham: but that may not be

[0:35:05] Voice 7: so we because the staff report has been written it's going to the ltc

[0:35:09] Voice 7: it's it's it's been a fairly long process i don't think in this case that would be

[0:35:13] Voice 7: um but normally yes that's that's true chair yeah

[0:35:17] Trustee Luckham: okay so

[0:35:19] Trustee Stamford: i just want to be really clear because

[0:35:20] Trustee Stamford: this this is kind of a big deal in my neighborhood um what we're looking at is actually just on page

[0:35:29] Trustee Stamford: page 129 is what's being asked there's a map there so

[0:35:36] Voice 7: page 129 yeah so let's um let the

[0:35:40] Trustee Luckham: planner continue and maybe you can reference that section that trustee uh uh stanford is

[0:35:45] Trustee Luckham: speaking of

[0:35:45] Voice 7: i'm not sure oh so through the chair uh page 128 and 129 of the agenda package

[0:35:52] Voice 7: pardon me not of the report of the agenda package are they are the site plan great that

[0:35:58] Voice 7: is that is

[0:35:59] Voice 7: under consideration yes super thank you

[0:36:01] Voice 7: that's correct yeah so this application as you probably

[0:36:05] Voice 7: recall was on your agenda at a much earlier date i believe it was last january the notification

[0:36:11] Voice 7: had gone out but there was an error well there was an issue with the riparian report by cascade

[0:36:18] Voice 7: that wasn't accepted by the province yet so that was pulled from your agenda and so that's

[0:36:24] Voice 7: apologies for that confusion but the we now have an accepted wrapper report which is which is forms

[0:36:30] Voice 7: part of the development permit that you're considering today um and staff consider that

[0:36:35] Voice 7: report and the development um including the proposed plans we just uh looked at page 128 29

[0:36:42] Voice 7: um to be uh in conformance with the dpa uh guidelines and so we're recommending issue

[0:36:49] Voice 7: Issuing the permit per recommendation one, as you see in the beginning of this staff report.

[0:36:58] Voice 7: So two notices had gone out.

[0:37:00] Voice 7: In response to both notices, there was some concern from constituents, from property owners in the area, as I think you've heard.

[0:37:12] Voice 7: and you were provided primarily around the location of the septic system

[0:37:17] Voice 7: in proximity to the watercourses

[0:37:20] Voice 7: and how that might affect downstream water quality, etc.

[0:37:25] Voice 7: Because the plans have changed

[0:37:29] Voice 7: and the consideration is per this wrapper report that you have in front of you,

[0:37:33] Voice 7: that septic system has been,

[0:37:36] Voice 7: the location has essentially been moved outside the setback area

[0:37:40] Voice 7: And the consideration of whether it's okay to site it in the location per that plan in the RAP report is mainly the jurisdiction of a registered septic technician, which the applicant has had the system designed by that professional and also filed with Island Health.

[0:38:01] Voice 7: So, to be clear, although concerns over the location of a septic system close to watercourse is absolutely valid, the LTC in this case is not being asked to vary that provision of the bylaw any longer because it's outside the setback area.

[0:38:18] Voice 7: So, there really isn't a decision there.

[0:38:20] Voice 7: It's really up to the septic technician, professional and Island Health, that's their jurisdiction to approve that or not.

[0:38:31] Voice 7: And so the house and the septic system and the parking lot driveway is what is being, is the substance of this application now, as you'll see on page 128-29 in those plans.

[0:38:48] Voice 7: plans. I think that's, I'll leave it at that for now. As I said, staff are recommending

[0:38:55] Voice 7: issuing it, the permit, based on the fact that we consider it to meet the guidelines

[0:39:00] Voice 7: in your land use by-law. And if you have any questions, you can take any now. And the applicant

[0:39:06] Voice 7: is also on this call.

[0:39:09] Trustee Luckham: All right. Okay. Thank you, Planner Cox. I'll just turn to the applicant. Do you have anything

[0:39:15] Trustee Luckham: Anything you'd like to share with us at this time or advise us if you concur with the report?

[0:39:31] Voice 11: Hi there.

[0:39:33] Voice 11: No, I concur with the report and I've got nothing to add to this conversation.

[0:39:40] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[0:39:41] Trustee Luckham: Thank you very much for joining us then.

[0:39:43] Trustee Luckham: And just stay, hang in there just in case trustees have any questions for you.

[0:39:49] Trustee Luckham: But let's go to trustees.

[0:39:52] Trustee Luckham: Are there any questions for staff or the applicant here?

[0:39:57] Trustee Luckham: uh kate louise stanford

[0:39:59] Trustee Stamford: i'll uh i have a question for the applicant just while we've got him because

[0:40:05] Trustee Stamford: it looks like he's driving um i'm

[0:40:07] Voice 12: not driving um

[0:40:09] Trustee Stamford: i just want to catch you when i can uh steven

[0:40:12] Trustee Stamford: um just specifics to the house um you mentions in the documentation you're looking at a three-story

[0:40:21] Trustee Stamford: building what's the um reasoning behind that three three-story building uh

[0:40:28] Voice 12: the fact that we

[0:40:29] Voice 12: can only uh we can't build that that wide like we can't build a rancher so we can go up okay

[0:40:36] Trustee Stamford: so just watch those heights um i know people will be looking at that you've got neighbors

[0:40:41] Trustee Stamford: all around you so just

[0:40:43] Voice 11: to suggest i'm well aware

[0:40:44] Trustee Stamford: absolutely nothing

[0:40:47] Voice 11: nothing but to follow the rules

[0:40:49] Voice 11: rolls the whole time.

[0:40:51] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I suspected that's what it was, but I just wanted to make sure. So

[0:40:55] Trustee Stamford: that's the only question I have of the applicant.

[0:40:58] Trustee Luckham: Okay, very good. Thank you. Trustee Bernardo,

[0:41:01] Trustee Luckham: anything?

[0:41:02] Voice 5: I don't have any questions. You know, I'll leave the community relations issue to

[0:41:07] Voice 5: Trustee Sanford. But typically, if we're presented with an application that has,

[0:41:14] Voice 5: you know the approval of staff and uh the applicant is fine with it unless something

[0:41:20] Voice 5: really jumps out uh i'm inclined to go along with what staff is telling us because they're

[0:41:25] Voice 5: pretty thorough on that front so no questions at my end okay

[0:41:29] Trustee Luckham: thank you so um do either of you

[0:41:33] Trustee Luckham: want to make a motion or as presented in the package at uh recommendation number one

[0:41:40] Trustee Stamford: what's the page again um oh

[0:41:43] Trustee Luckham: i don't know 106 page 60

[0:41:45] Trustee Stamford: 160 right

[0:41:47] Trustee Luckham: 60 60 yeah

[0:41:54] Trustee Stamford: i'm just going through it

[0:41:55] Trustee Stamford: to make sure yep um and it would be

[0:41:59] Voice 5: actually to have these agenda items up on the screen when

[0:42:02] Voice 5: we're dealing with them yeah

[0:42:03] Trustee Stamford: no i i've got it now but um i think you've answered a lot of the

[0:42:10] Trustee Stamford: the questions i had was around the variance so um that's that's helpful there we go thank you

[0:42:17] Voice 5: okay

[0:42:21] Trustee Stamford: um i moved that the gambier on local trust committee approved issuance of dmdp

[0:42:27] Trustee Stamford: 2023.1 with the condition that the development is in accordance with the riparian areas protection

[0:42:33] Trustee Stamford: regulations detailed assessment report by cascade environmental limited attached to

[0:42:39] Trustee Stamford: and forming part of the development permit.

[0:42:43] Trustee Luckham: I second.

[0:42:44] Trustee Luckham: Moved, seconded by Trustee Bernardo.

[0:42:46] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:42:48] Trustee Luckham: Is there any discussion?

[0:42:51] Trustee Luckham: Yeah,

[0:42:51] Trustee Stamford: I would like to make some comments about this

[0:42:54] Trustee Stamford: because first of all,

[0:42:57] Trustee Stamford: this is a very challenging piece of property.

[0:43:00] Trustee Stamford: It doesn't show anywhere in the photographs,

[0:43:04] Trustee Stamford: but it was quite heavily cleared,

[0:43:06] Trustee Stamford: which caused some consternation around the area to be fair the whole area is is being the subject

[0:43:17] Trustee Stamford: of many bylaw and variance requests it is challenging this is part of the watershed

[0:43:25] Trustee Stamford: for whispering creek it's quite a well-established subdivision area so there is lots of homes here

[0:43:34] Trustee Stamford: but everything is wet um and i know a lot of people have been watching this carefully they

[0:43:41] Trustee Stamford: were very concerned about the septic i really appreciate that it's being moved further in

[0:43:47] Trustee Stamford: and and have to accept that um professionals are looking at the best case scenario and i also want

[0:43:55] Trustee Stamford: to put out to the community that when we're looking at these challenging properties um

[0:43:59] Trustee Stamford: You can't sterilize properties. People have to be able to build. So everybody's trying to work to the best case scenario.

[0:44:08] Trustee Stamford: And I really hope that we can find new technologies and new ways of working within these wetland properties, which there's still many and there's still many open variance requests in this area or upcoming building requests that are going to be challenging to accommodate.

[0:44:30] Trustee Stamford: And so, anyway, I appreciate the work that's gone into this, and I'm ready to vote on it.

[0:44:37] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[0:44:39] Trustee Luckham: Ian, I see your hand up.

[0:44:40] Trustee Luckham: We're at the voting discussion stage here.

[0:44:43] Trustee Luckham: Did you have something that we needed to hear?

[0:44:46] Voice 7: Thanks, Chair.

[0:44:47] Voice 7: I would just add to the trustee's comments that for the community concern, they can also be looking at the draft conditions of this permit,

[0:44:57] Voice 7: which are quite extensive uh that were pulled from the rap report itself so there's a there's

[0:45:02] Voice 7: a monitoring component um there's flagging um for those uh those watercourses etc so that's that's

[0:45:09] Voice 7: been included that has not been forgotten okay okay

[0:45:12] Trustee Luckham: uh if there's no further discussion i'm

[0:45:15] Trustee Luckham: going to call for the vote all those in favor please raise your hands digitally or physically

[0:45:19] Trustee Luckham: and that carries unanimously and so that concludes that so good luck with your project uh mr delaney

[0:45:26] Trustee Luckham: and um we'll um continue on um 8.3 is uh resolution to sign a section 219 covenant

[0:45:40] Trustee Luckham: uh planner tamaris um you're there you are um you're here to introduce this um i'm not sure

[0:45:49] Trustee Luckham: if there's an applicant here or not or that's necessarily relevant um so i'll just turn it

[0:45:55] Trustee Luckham: over to you, Planner McCarty. Oh, hang on. I see. Now I'm confused here. Planner Tomatis,

[0:46:05] Trustee Luckham: over to you.

[0:46:06] Planner Thomaidis (probable): Thank you. Good morning, everyone. So this is a report, like you said, to provide

[0:46:12] Planner Thomaidis (probable): the LTC with two Section 219 covenants required as a condition of subdivision for a proposed

[0:46:21] Planner Thomaidis (probable): subdivision application in cotton bay so a resolution is required from the ltc to authorize

[0:46:27] Planner Thomaidis (probable): you the chair to sign the two covenants it's pretty straightforward basically the proposed

[0:46:35] Planner Thomaidis (probable): subdivision is for 11 residential lots and a community lot in cotton bay the application

[0:46:42] Planner Thomaidis (probable): was received and comments and conditions were sent to the ministry of transportation and

[0:46:46] Planner Thomaidis (probable): infrastructure in January. And two conditions of subdivision were laid out as these required

[0:46:55] Planner Thomaidis (probable): covenants. One is a no further subdivision covenant as a condition of subdivision. A

[0:47:03] Planner Thomaidis (probable): section 219 covenant prohibiting further subdivision of two lots that currently have

[0:47:10] Planner Thomaidis (probable): two proposed lots that have subdivision potential. So they're large enough to be

[0:47:14] Planner Thomaidis (probable): subdivided in the future this covenant would restrict subdivision and then the other covenant

[0:47:20] Planner Thomaidis (probable): is for no private docks so on any waterfront lots aside from the lot l so there is a community lot

[0:47:29] Planner Thomaidis (probable): proposed as part of the subdivision and it's it actually has a community a neighborhood dock

[0:47:37] Planner Thomaidis (probable): a shared neighborhood dock so this covenant the no private docks covenant also a condition of

[0:47:45] Planner Thomaidis (probable): subdivision as per the land use bylaw would apply to any other waterfront lots other than that

[0:47:51] Planner Thomaidis (probable): community lot that already has the neighborhood dock prohibiting the installation construction

[0:47:59] Planner Thomaidis (probable): of any new docks thank you and then staff is recommending that the Gambier LTC accept the

[0:48:07] Planner Thomaidis (probable): covenants under section 219 of the Land Title Act from the registered owners of PID 015980324

[0:48:15] Planner Thomaidis (probable): and 027998967 and designate the chair of the Gambier LTC to sign the covenants for

[0:48:23] Planner Thomaidis (probable): GMSUB 2022.2. And if you have any questions, the applicant isn't present, but this is more of an

[0:48:30] Planner Thomaidis (probable): administrative condition of subdivision. So I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

[0:48:37] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Any questions? Otherwise, I'd be happy to hear a motion.

[0:48:43] Trustee Stamford: I'll put the motion forward, but I do have a couple of comments and maybe a question following.

[0:48:48] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee accept the covenants under Section 219 of the Land Title Act for the registered owners of PID 015980324 and 027998967

[0:49:03] Trustee Stamford: and designate the chair of the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[0:49:06] Trustee Stamford: to sign the covenants for GM's SUB 2022.2.

[0:49:11] Trustee Luckham: Right.

[0:49:12] Trustee Luckham: Moved then.

[0:49:13] Trustee Luckham: So do I have a seconder?

[0:49:15] Trustee Luckham: Second.

[0:49:15] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:49:17] Trustee Luckham: So discussion, comments?

[0:49:20] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[0:49:21] Trustee Stamford: You know, I recognize it's just a part of the formula,

[0:49:26] Trustee Stamford: but the way the subdivision is being laid out,

[0:49:31] Trustee Stamford: My very first meeting as a trustee in 2011 was where we talked about this subdivision.

[0:49:37] Trustee Stamford: And I think that length of time, how this particular property was divided out and the

[0:49:47] Trustee Stamford: plans around it have taken so long that it would behoove the applicant to talk to the

[0:49:56] Trustee Stamford: community about it.

[0:49:57] Trustee Stamford: that there's possible access to Cotton Bay that we don't have right now, if I can see on the plans.

[0:50:04] Trustee Stamford: There's a variety of questions I have more towards the overall subdivision rather than this particular

[0:50:11] Trustee Stamford: covenant issue. I am pleased to see this because it has always been a concern that I haven't seen

[0:50:16] Trustee Stamford: it to date um and this was a part of the discussion uh way back in 2011. so um um i will probably

[0:50:27] Trustee Stamford: reach out to mr green myself and see if we can get some uh community information out so everybody's

[0:50:35] Trustee Stamford: aware of this particular subdivision okay

[0:50:39] Trustee Luckham: thank you very much for that anything else uh trustee

[0:50:42] Trustee Luckham: you, Bernardo?

[0:50:43] Voice 5: Not so much a question, but, you know, kind of just a general comment for the

[0:50:49] Voice 5: benefit of the record. I would just ask the planner to confirm that the effect of the covenants

[0:50:56] Voice 5: will impose conditions that travel with the land and will apply to the successors of each of these

[0:51:04] Voice 5: some divided properties when it comes to pass.

[0:51:09] Voice 5: And, you know, that's something we're aware of,

[0:51:12] Voice 5: but I think, you know, it's useful in a situation like this

[0:51:16] Voice 5: to have that on the record.

[0:51:17] Voice 5: So have I got that right, Planner?

[0:51:20] Voice 5: Sorry.

[0:51:22] Voice 5: Yes, Trustee.

[0:51:24] Planner Thomaidis (probable): Thaumatis.

[0:51:25] Planner Thomaidis (probable): But yeah, yes, Trustee Bernardo, that's correct.

[0:51:27] Planner Thomaidis (probable): It runs with the land.

[0:51:28] Planner Thomaidis (probable): Both of these covenants would run with the land

[0:51:31] Planner Thomaidis (probable): and apply in perpetuity to the proposed lots.

[0:51:36] Voice 5: Thank you, Planner Tomaitis.

[0:51:39] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Very good.

[0:51:41] Trustee Luckham: I just have sort of an interesting remark

[0:51:45] Trustee Luckham: in that this subdivision actually continues to maintain

[0:51:49] Trustee Luckham: more or less the 10-acre minimum,

[0:51:51] Trustee Luckham: which was imposed now in the trust area back in 1974.

[0:51:55] Trustee Luckham: And Tim Peterson on Laskete likes to express his pride

[0:51:59] Trustee Luckham: in that Laskete is one of the few communities

[0:52:01] Trustee Luckham: that continues to maintain that 10-acre minimum.

[0:52:04] Trustee Luckham: Here's another example on another island

[0:52:06] Trustee Luckham: that continues to support that 10-acre minimum,

[0:52:08] Trustee Luckham: and that's good.

[0:52:10] Trustee Luckham: I'm sure there's issues and things

[0:52:13] Trustee Luckham: that will have to be navigated,

[0:52:18] Trustee Luckham: but I just think that's reasonable to recognize

[0:52:22] Trustee Luckham: that this was the minimum maximum standard back in 1974.

[0:52:27] Trustee Luckham: and

[0:52:28] Trustee Stamford: that's that's how it was there was never a question about it with this type of subdivision

[0:52:35] Trustee Stamford: so yeah

[0:52:36] Trustee Luckham: yeah so well done and so if there's no further discussion or questions i'll just call

[0:52:41] Trustee Luckham: the question um all those in favor raise your hands electronically otherwise and that carries

[0:52:47] Trustee Luckham: unanimously and um so uh hopefully you'll apply my electronic signature but uh i i do sign

[0:52:54] Trustee Luckham: documents when they're circulated in my direction. So thank you, Planner Tomatis, for bringing this

[0:53:00] Trustee Luckham: to us today. I am now going to go. If you're okay, we'll continue on. We've been at this almost

[0:53:07] Trustee Luckham: an hour. Do you want to have a break before we go to the minor project section? Five minutes or so.

[0:53:13] Trustee Luckham: Refresh your tea. I see a nodding.

[0:53:17] Voice 4: So let's

[0:53:18] Trustee Luckham: refresh our teas and coffees and recess. Let's say for 10

[0:53:24] Trustee Luckham: minutes that'll give us plenty of time for the water to boil and we'll come back just shortly

[0:53:29] Trustee Luckham: after 11 o'clock and we'll proceed with the minor project keats shoreline protection project thank

[0:53:34] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:53:35] Voice 4: Thanks.

[1:07:02] Trustee Luckham: Welcome back, everyone.

[1:07:05] Trustee Luckham: So here we are at the minor projects, the Keats Shoreline Protection Project.

[1:07:13] Trustee Luckham: We are a post-public hearing.

[1:07:14] Trustee Luckham: We know that.

[1:07:15] Trustee Luckham: We have a staff report here from Senator McCarger, it looks a bit.

[1:07:21] Trustee Luckham: And so let us begin.

[1:07:25] Trustee Luckham: Let's get a summary on the report and let's figure out where we're at with advancing this today.

[1:07:33] Trustee Luckham: All right.

[1:07:34] Trustee Luckham: All

[1:07:34] Planner McCargar: right, so we've seen a sort of...

[1:07:39] Planner McCargar: I'm happy

[1:07:40] Voice 5: to hear from Planner McCarger again,

[1:07:45] Voice 5: but there really isn't anything new.

[1:07:47] Voice 5: We heard the summary last time

[1:07:49] Voice 5: and we tabled the discussion.

[1:07:51] Voice 5: We were underway.

[1:07:52] Voice 5: And if Planner McCarger has something new to add,

[1:07:57] Voice 5: that's fine,

[1:07:58] Voice 5: but it might be convenient for everybody

[1:08:01] Voice 5: if we just dive into the thing

[1:08:03] Voice 5: because we're all very familiar with the outstanding issue is so just that suggestion

[1:08:07] Voice 5: thank you um

[1:08:09] Trustee Luckham: sure yeah i'm always cognizant of the members of the public that may be new to the

[1:08:13] Trustee Luckham: conversation um or not up to date or perhaps assuming that maybe there's some additional

[1:08:20] Trustee Luckham: information which as you're correct we're really at where we were when we tabled the uh the motion

[1:08:27] Trustee Luckham: a month ago, a little bit over a month ago.

[1:08:30] Trustee Luckham: And however, this is a new report for this meeting.

[1:08:35] Trustee Luckham: So let's give Planner McCargar an opportunity

[1:08:40] Trustee Luckham: to help us recall the facts of the situation

[1:08:44] Trustee Luckham: and then we'll proceed.

[1:08:46] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[1:08:47] Planner McCargar: Okay, thank you.

[1:08:48] Planner McCargar: I will keep it brief.

[1:08:50] Planner McCargar: We've seen a version of this report a couple of times now,

[1:08:54] Planner McCargar: now, but there is a little bit of additional information. So just a really quick overview,

[1:09:01] Planner McCargar: Bylaw 153 is the OCP amendment, and it designates near shore upland and marine areas as a shoreline

[1:09:09] Planner McCargar: development permit area to protect the natural environment, ecosystems, biological diversity,

[1:09:14] Planner McCargar: and mitigate hazardous conditions. Bylaw number 154 is the land use bylaw amendment,

[1:09:21] Planner McCargar: And it updates regulations for marine structures, limits exemptions from the setback requirements, and introduces guidelines for dock, construction shoreline modifications, vegetation restoration, and includes a number of exemptions.

[1:09:37] Planner McCargar: So the current, we've had a public hearing back in the summer, and several community information meetings have been held over the course of the project.

[1:09:46] Planner McCargar: The current status is the bylaws were given second reading in May of 2024, and then the public hearing happened in the summer, and at the October 1st LTC meeting, a motion was tabled.

[1:10:02] Planner McCargar: The motion proposes an exemption for additions to buildings between 7.5 meters and 15 meters from the natural boundary of the sea.

[1:10:12] Planner McCargar: so the next steps would be to one withdraw or defeat the motion and proceed with the bylaws

[1:10:21] Planner McCargar: as presented in the package today option two would be to carry the motion amend the bylaws

[1:10:28] Planner McCargar: to include the exemption and option three would be to defeat the bylaws altogether if they no

[1:10:34] Planner McCargar: longer align with community and LTC expectations. A majority vote is required to proceed. It's not

[1:10:45] Planner McCargar: a consensus decision. So staff right now are seeking direction from the LTC on how to move

[1:10:52] Planner McCargar: forward with these bylaws. As Trustee Luckham mentioned earlier in the meeting, we're in the

[1:10:58] Planner McCargar: post-public hearing phase of the project so no new information can be introduced and with any

[1:11:06] Planner McCargar: increasing amount of time that we stay in this phase we do increase the risk that conversations

[1:11:12] Planner McCargar: are going to be held in the community with LTC members and the public and just risk that new

[1:11:18] Planner McCargar: information would get introduced and I think that's it from from my report if there's any

[1:11:25] Planner McCargar: any questions, please ask them now.

[1:11:32] Trustee Luckham: Okay, very good. Thank you. So just for clarity,

[1:11:37] Trustee Luckham: the conversation that we had last week or last time go around was about changing of the

[1:11:44] Trustee Luckham: potential amendments for changing the setbacks and the second item being the change of the

[1:11:51] Trustee Luckham: the exemptions to include new construct or an additional additions of a certain size.

[1:12:01] Trustee Luckham: If we need to, if we want to make any or a portion of those motions, amendments today,

[1:12:08] Trustee Luckham: we need to do that before we go to the third reading piece. Is that correct?

[1:12:12] Planner McCargar: Correct. So there's just one motion on the table currently, and that is the additional

[1:12:20] Planner McCargar: additional exemption for for additions in the seven and a half meter to 15 meter area of the

[1:12:26] Planner McCargar: dpa and then i believe that trustee bernardo has a another amendment to propose but that hasn't been

[1:12:34] Planner McCargar: proposed as of yet okay

[1:12:37] Trustee Luckham: so then um that tabled motion is shown on page i believe 146 and so i

[1:12:46] Trustee Luckham: I think I would like to get that motion back into discussion.

[1:12:50] Trustee Luckham: So we'd remove it from the table and bring it back for discussion and then proceed.

[1:12:56] Trustee Luckham: So before we do that, is there any further thoughts at this time about how we would like

[1:13:01] Trustee Luckham: to proceed with this conversation, Trustee Stanford?

[1:13:08] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, thank you, Chair.

[1:13:09] Trustee Stamford: I was a little thrown off at our last conversation about the length and the breadth of the comments.

[1:13:19] Trustee Stamford: from trustee bernardo that i could not respond um you know went on for quite a long time so i was

[1:13:27] Trustee Stamford: not able to respond to specific comments so if comments and thoughts are made if we could just

[1:13:33] Trustee Stamford: make them short uh one comment or two comments at a time so then it allows for discussion uh rather

[1:13:41] Trustee Stamford: than a long preamble where I get lost. So thank

[1:13:49] Trustee Luckham: you. Okay, fair enough. So maybe make a remark,

[1:13:58] Trustee Luckham: but I'll turn it to Trustee Bernardo. Do you have any suggestions about how we proceed here

[1:14:04] Trustee Luckham: at this point?

[1:14:07] Voice 5: No particular suggestions. I think we should just get into the debate. I take Trustee

[1:14:11] Voice 5: D. Stanford's point, I did go on at length the last time. That's because I wanted to

[1:14:20] Voice 5: be clear on the record about what position I was taking, because I recognize it makes

[1:14:29] Voice 5: this whole position I'm taking is creating a certain amount of difficulty in advancing

[1:14:36] Voice 5: this project and completing it. And it was important, I think, to state all of the reasons

[1:14:42] Voice 5: on the record, especially since, as Planner Cargill has pointed out, I do fully appreciate

[1:14:48] Voice 5: that adopting my resolution may well result in the need to have another public hearing.

[1:14:56] Voice 5: And I wanted to be clear that I thought that if that comes to pass, that's an inconvenience

[1:15:04] Voice 5: that is worth having in the event it's necessary.

[1:15:10] Voice 5: but if it is you know if this resolution does pass uh it's going to be a different public hearing

[1:15:16] Voice 5: because uh it'll i'll be in a position to be able to defend this fully without any qualifications

[1:15:23] Voice 5: so uh that's just by way of responding and you know i understand where trustee sanford's coming

[1:15:27] Voice 5: from uh yeah i piled a lot out there uh and yes let's proceed in a in a briefer uh way uh going

[1:15:34] Voice 5: forward apart from that i've got nothing to add about process thank you okay

[1:15:41] Trustee Luckham: um yeah uh so i'm

[1:15:44] Trustee Luckham: just gonna read this motion out for the record um to get it back on the tables for discussion

[1:15:50] Trustee Luckham: and then we need to uh because it was moved and seconded and so therefore we need to defeat it or

[1:15:57] Trustee Luckham: amend it further or support it. And we don't necessarily need to revisit all of the conversation

[1:16:11] Trustee Luckham: we've had. I think the motion is there and it stands on its own merits. And so I'm going to

[1:16:17] Trustee Luckham: proceed in that fashion. And so the motion that was tabled is that the proposed bylaw number 154

[1:16:24] Trustee Luckham: be amended by the insertion of the following exemption as subsection 9.3.2 subsection c

[1:16:30] Trustee Luckham: quote additions to pre-existing building structures and utilities situated between 7.5 meters and

[1:16:38] Trustee Luckham: 15 meters from the natural boundary of the sea provided always that no part of the work may

[1:16:45] Trustee Luckham: involve the use of earth moving machinery or the removal of native tree species the addition does

[1:16:50] Trustee Luckham: does not exceed 50 square meters, that's 540 square feet in area, and must be erected on

[1:16:57] Trustee Luckham: previously disturbed land, and the work does not result in the environmental degradation of any

[1:17:03] Trustee Luckham: kind anywhere within DP3 or to the ecology of the foreshore. So that's the motion.

[1:17:13] Trustee Luckham: So I'm just going to simply ask for a discussion. Who would like to speak to whether you're in

[1:17:19] Trustee Luckham: in support or not of this motion and whether or not there's further amendments that might be

[1:17:23] Trustee Luckham: considered who would like to go first well okay

[1:17:30] Voice 5: since i'm the arch troublemaker here i guess i'd

[1:17:32] Voice 5: better go first and i'll and if it's possible

[1:17:35] Trustee Luckham: to speak up a bit i don't know why the volume is so

[1:17:38] Trustee Luckham: low today i've got my hearing

[1:17:40] Trustee Luckham: aids cranked up as well uh

[1:17:43] Voice 5: is that any better a

[1:17:45] Trustee Luckham: little yeah all right

[1:17:49] Voice 5: Right. Right. I might as well go first here because, you know, I'm not muted.

[1:17:59] Trustee Luckham: I'm not.

[1:18:00] Trustee Luckham: That's my fault. I was trying to adjust the volume here. Go ahead.

[1:18:05] Voice 5: All right. Can you hear me OK now? Yes.

[1:18:08] Voice 5: OK, thank you.

[1:18:10] Voice 5: As you pointed out, Peter, we've already debated this a lot.

[1:18:13] Voice 5: And, you know, those unanimous votes we just heard a little while ago, they kind of fill me with great longing, you know,

[1:18:20] Voice 5: Because I don't think any of us want to keep going in circles.

[1:18:23] Voice 5: You've heard my arguments many times.

[1:18:25] Voice 5: We do need to resolve this.

[1:18:28] Voice 5: A lot of work has gone into this project.

[1:18:30] Voice 5: And we're now down to this final difference.

[1:18:34] Voice 5: Very briefly, and I'm going to repeat very, very briefly a couple of points,

[1:18:38] Voice 5: is that where I'm coming from with this is really about our relationship with the public.

[1:18:45] Voice 5: and that the views of the public, of the specific public

[1:18:51] Voice 5: that will be affected by the bylaw or bylaws

[1:18:54] Voice 5: has to be weighed in a sincere and serious way.

[1:18:59] Voice 5: And I appreciate there is inherent uncertainty

[1:19:03] Voice 5: about the representativeness of the submissions we receive

[1:19:09] Voice 5: because it depends on who chooses to step forward.

[1:19:14] Voice 5: but even recognizing that that difficulty it's not for us to quarrel with a consultation process

[1:19:24] Voice 5: as legislated it is what it is and it's incumbent on us to you know to hear what we've been told

[1:19:32] Voice 5: not play pay lip service but actually hear it and then work through it but you know as trustee

[1:19:38] Voice 5: Stanford has said more than once, and she's right, our job isn't merely to follow what we hear

[1:19:45] Voice 5: from the public. It's our job to weigh it. And as you both know, the dominant public sentiment

[1:19:55] Voice 5: throughout this process is that Keats residents don't want the bylaws. What I've tried to do

[1:20:04] Voice 5: is revise them so their measures are rationally supportable and at least reflect the physical

[1:20:12] Voice 5: reality of historical occupancy and to the extent that overlaps with where the community is at

[1:20:20] Voice 5: and I do believe that's where the substance of the public resistance is coming from but unlike

[1:20:27] Voice 5: most of the constituents you've heard from I do believe that updating the dock regulations and

[1:20:32] Voice 5: in introducing DP3 will be helpful

[1:20:34] Voice 5: and in keeping with the mandate,

[1:20:36] Voice 5: provided they respect existing local conditions.

[1:20:39] Voice 5: And that's why I'm asking the LTC to support my resolution.

[1:20:43] Voice 5: It's worded in a way to ensure

[1:20:45] Voice 5: that there's no further disturbance

[1:20:47] Voice 5: to the environment within DP3.

[1:20:50] Voice 5: And I've worked very hard to try to make the bylaws

[1:20:54] Voice 5: as good as they can be in a way

[1:20:57] Voice 5: that helped advance the mandate,

[1:21:00] Voice 5: but also respects the community.

[1:21:03] Voice 5: This is the last step.

[1:21:04] Voice 5: And I really, really hope, you know,

[1:21:06] Voice 5: we can bring the project to a successful conclusion

[1:21:09] Voice 5: by passing it.

[1:21:10] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:21:12] Trustee Luckham: Okay, thank you, Trustee Bernardo.

[1:21:14] Trustee Luckham: Trustee Stamford.

[1:21:20] Trustee Stamford: I've really struggled with this.

[1:21:21] Trustee Stamford: I've looked at it over and over for the past month.

[1:21:25] Trustee Stamford: You can hear me okay, Chair Latham?

[1:21:28] Trustee Stamford: Yep. Okay.

[1:21:30] Trustee Stamford: And I continued, I recognize the huge level of work

[1:21:34] Trustee Stamford: that's gone into this.

[1:21:35] Trustee Stamford: And we had great discussion, good debate, have worked through many, many adjustments to this to acknowledge the very aspects that Trustee Bernardo is saying about the community and that need for livability in recognizably very tight areas.

[1:21:57] Trustee Stamford: is this last request for me is is beyond livability it's giving um an extra um opportunity

[1:22:12] Trustee Stamford: to develop which takes it outside the very principles of what we're trying to accomplish

[1:22:20] Trustee Stamford: here, which is for shore protection. Any kind of extra build is possible, but I want the proper

[1:22:32] Trustee Stamford: responses from the correct authorities like QEPs to ensure that the work does not result

[1:22:40] Trustee Stamford: in environmental degradation. You would need that external resource to demonstrate that.

[1:22:46] Trustee Stamford: I'm not an expert. Most of my neighbors are an expert to determine whether or not environmental

[1:22:51] Trustee Stamford: degradation is occurring. Um, anything, uh, any kind of addition on disturbed land or non-disturbed

[1:23:01] Trustee Stamford: land, it impacts the permeability of the land. Disturbed land doesn't mean it has no ecological

[1:23:07] Trustee Stamford: process attached to it. It, but it is something worth looking at when a situation comes up and

[1:23:15] Trustee Stamford: that we have the ability to see how a particular project comes to fruition on a particular piece

[1:23:24] Trustee Stamford: of property to make sure that everything that is done is possible in this sensitive ecosystem.

[1:23:31] Trustee Stamford: And it doesn't mean we can't do it. It's just that the process is a little bit different.

[1:23:35] Trustee Stamford: And this is only speaking to things like additions. Everything else that we've worked on,

[1:23:41] Trustee Stamford: we've given exceptions to allow people to live on their land and do what they need to do

[1:23:48] Trustee Stamford: in an area that, granted, is very tight and is quite unusual. But it doesn't mean that we let

[1:23:56] Trustee Stamford: those principles aside, which is why we started this whole process in the first place. So for

[1:24:04] Trustee Stamford: these reasons i i cannot support this motion as it stands okay

[1:24:15] Trustee Luckham: thank you um my opportunity to speak

[1:24:21] Trustee Luckham: to it i have pondered this and struggled with this over the entire time since our last meeting

[1:24:31] Trustee Luckham: um and there's a couple of things that um in many respects i'm actually still undecided

[1:24:40] Trustee Luckham: And so I'm very interested in hearing what you trustees on your islands have to say.

[1:24:53] Trustee Luckham: You know, we're talking about a shoreline protection area at 15 meters, which was reduced from an original proposition, if I'm not mistaken.

[1:25:03] Trustee Luckham: And to some extent, this amendment continues to reduce or return that setback from the sea to the original seven and a half meter number, which is identified everywhere as inadequate for protection area.

[1:25:26] Trustee Luckham: area. And so to me, there's a question, I don't need the answer really, but it's just the lingering

[1:25:34] Trustee Luckham: question is whether or not we support the development, the shoreline protection area

[1:25:40] Trustee Luckham: at all. And certainly there are folks that don't, and that's true. Whether or not this amendments

[1:25:49] Trustee Luckham: will change any of those minds, I don't know. I don't think that it would. But the whole idea of

[1:25:57] Trustee Luckham: having the shoreline protection area is to encourage a development it's not there's probably

[1:26:06] Trustee Luckham: a different word it's a little softer development always seems very hard and harsh and and it's not

[1:26:12] Trustee Luckham: necessarily the view of keats islanders will say um so the idea of the protection area is to move

[1:26:23] Trustee Luckham: that development work outside of the area that is deemed to be protected. And I think,

[1:26:29] Trustee Luckham: you know, Trustee Bernardo, you acknowledge that and you worded this amendment in a way

[1:26:35] Trustee Luckham: that I think speaks to that and respects that necessity for being careful.

[1:26:41] Trustee Luckham: But I think a 500 square foot addition is substantial. And if in any possible way that

[1:26:50] Trustee Luckham: that can be encouraged outside of the development permit area all the better.

[1:26:55] Trustee Luckham: And presumably, this would be a building that is already in the setback in the protected area.

[1:27:02] Trustee Luckham: And so presumably, there would be options to move a 540 square foot area, maybe still attached to

[1:27:10] Trustee Luckham: the main building on the opposite side of the area. So I don't know. Each one of these

[1:27:16] Trustee Luckham: circumstances that have to be dealt with individually, which is why a development

[1:27:20] Trustee Luckham: variance permit exists. So, we're not denying folks the opportunity to do this at this stage.

[1:27:28] Trustee Luckham: It would be up to them through a process, development permit process application,

[1:27:34] Trustee Luckham: to explain why. And we've seen today, actually, we've provided variance permits in those situations

[1:27:40] Trustee Luckham: where it's necessary. And we do often throughout the trust area. I'm sure there's questions about

[1:27:46] Trustee Luckham: but whether or not we should be doing that, but we do, because that's the human element of it,

[1:27:50] Trustee Luckham: recognizing the public interest. So I'm just going to say that in the public hearing notes,

[1:27:57] Trustee Luckham: and I've looked through it carefully, and of course, I listened carefully at the situations.

[1:28:05] Trustee Luckham: Although there's certainly a lack of interest in a number of aspects of this whole shoreline

[1:28:09] Trustee Luckham: protection project and area, and we've addressed in some way what we can, and indeed, each of you

[1:28:15] Trustee Luckham: and Trustee Bernardo, you've accommodated some of the necessities of creating a protected area

[1:28:22] Trustee Luckham: to facilitate it. And we've come down to this remaining thing here. I didn't hear a lot of

[1:28:27] Trustee Luckham: people specifically talking about additions to existing structures of this magnitude and wanting

[1:28:35] Trustee Luckham: it to be exempted. And so I struggle with that because it might be few people. And I don't know

[1:28:45] Trustee Luckham: I don't know that the bylaw is necessarily going to affect how welcome this bylaw is in the first place. So I'm interested to understand how broad the interest is in this specific amendment.

[1:29:03] Trustee Luckham: amendment um however i think the right thing to do is to not approve this and i'm inclined

[1:29:13] Trustee Luckham: to not support it um and so i need to be and primarily because the whole rationale is to

[1:29:21] Trustee Luckham: move development outside of the area they want to protect period it's for me it's that black and

[1:29:27] Trustee Luckham: white so um i need to know more otherwise if there's no more to offer maybe we can't resolve

[1:29:34] Trustee Luckham: all of this other than calling the vote. And I'm happy to call the vote because I don't think we

[1:29:39] Trustee Luckham: can extend this any further. We've really talked it through. So any more remarks, trustees?

[1:29:52] Trustee Luckham: Yes. Okay. Trustee Bernardo, over to you.

[1:30:01] Voice 5: I think you're right that the rationale of the bylaw 154 is originally written with respect to this element is to move is an aspiration to move all development outside of DP three.

[1:30:19] Voice 5: Yeah, that is the rationale. My difficulty with that has been that it doesn't respect the physical reality on the ground.

[1:30:33] Voice 5: And specifically, what I have in mind is the many lots that Keats landed.

[1:30:44] Voice 5: If you'll recall, I mean, Peter, you mentioned that, you know, you didn't hear a tremendous amount of support for the idea of an exemption for additions that may not have been articulated and tell you it's there.

[1:30:59] Voice 5: and certainly when you consider the resistance and frustration that we heard at the public hearing

[1:31:06] Voice 5: and in previous submissions from the people at Keats Landing about the failure to understand

[1:31:12] Voice 5: their limitations in terms of their small lots those people do not to the extent that they want

[1:31:21] Voice 5: to improve old cabins or expand them or just even make them more compliant with you know modern

[1:31:29] Voice 5: standards if any expansion is required they don't have the option of moving

[1:31:37] Voice 5: outside of dp3 their houses already there they don't have room to go in

[1:31:41] Voice 5: there that's what this is all about you know if there's some flexibility here

[1:31:48] Voice 5: about changing the number in terms of the size the addition I guess we could

[1:31:53] Voice 5: discuss that but there's an

[1:31:56] Voice 5: additional problem here which is in a planer

[1:31:58] Voice 5: or Cargill has identified it, the alternative to this, to this resolution, is we're going

[1:32:08] Voice 5: to be confronted with another vote as to whether to approve the bylaws, you know, if it goes

[1:32:13] Voice 5: down and you don't support it, it comes down to there being a vote to pass the bylaws

[1:32:23] Voice 5: without the amendment

[1:32:23] Voice 5: which i will have to oppose and then we're confronted with two

[1:32:34] Voice 5: very unhappy situations one is the whole project goes down to defeat

[1:32:42] Voice 5: or the project passes against the wishes of the trustee from pete's island and against

[1:32:55] Voice 5: And really, I should be careful about how I word that.

[1:32:58] Voice 5: What I'm trying to say, it's against the best judgment of the person who's closest to the community, but also against the general drift of the public on Keats Island.

[1:33:15] Voice 5: They will not have been listened to.

[1:33:19] Voice 5: And I don't think that's good for us.

[1:33:22] Voice 5: It's certainly not going to be good for the credibility of the LTC.

[1:33:25] Voice 5: see uh in the community i don't think it's a healthy way to proceed we're not here to ram

[1:33:30] Voice 5: things down people's throats so um i i don't want to go there i i don't want either alternative

[1:33:40] Voice 5: and uh the rationale while it's true that the rationale is to move development outside of dp3

[1:33:48] Voice 5: and peter you forced me to keep coming back to this point which is what do we achieve by it

[1:33:54] Voice 5: when people are already there all we do is you know without giving people some flexibility to

[1:34:03] Voice 5: work with what they already have what we do is we impose unreasonable burdens on them we're going to

[1:34:10] Voice 5: force everybody in on keats landing to make a development permit application in every instance

[1:34:15] Voice 5: or virtually every instance and i don't think that's fair um uh that's what i got to say about

[1:34:25] Voice 5: that i mean it really in my view it does come down to uh respecting the needs of the community

[1:34:30] Voice 5: uh and i i really don't um the way the the way the the motion is worded the way the amendment

[1:34:38] Voice 5: is proposed is as robust as i can make it to make it consistent with the purposes of the mandate and

[1:34:47] Voice 5: the purposes of dp3 while still balancing the needs of the community and with nothing but respect

[1:34:54] Voice 5: Act, Trustee Stamford's remarks before, really add up to a conclusion that the Keats Island

[1:35:02] Voice 5: residents who are out on the foreshore or who have property on the shoreline, if they're given

[1:35:08] Voice 5: this exemption, they can't be trusted to apply correctly. And I disagree.

[1:35:13] Trustee Luckham: I don't

[1:35:14] Voice 5: think I

[1:35:15] Trustee Luckham: heard

[1:35:16] Trustee Luckham: heard that and maybe just move on but that's okay but let's

[1:35:22] Voice 5: may i please

[1:35:23] Voice 4: well

[1:35:24] Voice 5: if i can respond to

[1:35:26] Voice 5: your interruption and it will be done uh uh that's not what trustee sanford said but when she said

[1:35:36] Voice 5: that there's a need to have people from the outside vetting any development that's what it amounts to

[1:35:41] Voice 5: it. So let's not.

[1:35:44] Voice 5: All right. Then if I'm wrong, please straighten me out. Thank you.

[1:35:51] Trustee Luckham: Yeah. An application for a variance permit. I'm just going to talk about process, Kate. Now I'll

[1:35:58] Trustee Luckham: give you a chance to respond. Kate, Louise, Trustee Sanford didn't say that. Trustee Sanford

[1:36:05] Trustee Luckham: articulated, as I did, that if an individual wants to make some changes outside of the requirements

[1:36:12] Trustee Luckham: of the bylaw that they can apply for a development variance permit

[1:36:15] Trustee Luckham: that exists throughout the Islands Trust area.

[1:36:19] Trustee Luckham: And it's to insert a management practice into the process

[1:36:26] Trustee Luckham: and ensure that the rationale for it is based upon science

[1:36:32] Trustee Luckham: and professional information, as you've seen today

[1:36:36] Trustee Luckham: in the two development permits that we've advanced.

[1:36:40] Trustee Luckham: And I say again, we do advance them.

[1:36:41] Trustee Luckham: so um anyway that's that's my two cents there uh trustee stanford do you want to respond or add

[1:36:52] Trustee Luckham: other information here yeah

[1:36:55] Trustee Stamford: i i absolutely disagree that i'm imposing that people don't

[1:37:01] Trustee Stamford: know any difference so you know let's get the experts in this is a very complex scenario just

[1:37:08] Trustee Stamford: just like if it was perched on the side of a cliff

[1:37:11] Trustee Stamford: and we were requiring hazard engineering.

[1:37:20] Trustee Stamford: It's not something that necessarily

[1:37:24] Trustee Stamford: is what everybody understands or knows.

[1:37:26] Trustee Stamford: And we saw that today.

[1:37:28] Trustee Stamford: That was a very complex scenario

[1:37:32] Trustee Stamford: with the West Bay property.

[1:37:34] Trustee Stamford: It's caused a huge amount of kerfuffle in the community.

[1:37:38] Trustee Stamford: And the ability to take it through a process, and even with the septic system,

[1:37:45] Trustee Stamford: which is covered by an expert who knows how to put a septic system into a wetland.

[1:37:53] Trustee Stamford: These kinds of reports and an ability to request that kind of expertise

[1:38:01] Trustee Stamford: gives not it gives everyone else the assurance that steps are being taken in the best possible

[1:38:10] Trustee Stamford: light for that particular scenario I have I I listened to people too and I really understand

[1:38:19] Trustee Stamford: how difficult especially Keats Landing homes are in and this is just one small part of the

[1:38:28] Trustee Stamford: the challenges that they are going to be facing as they move towards subdivision. But to provide,

[1:38:34] Trustee Stamford: to do our land planning and our overall process based on a subdivision that actually doesn't

[1:38:41] Trustee Stamford: exist right now, and I'm not sure when it's going to exist, it's been going for 42 years,

[1:38:50] Trustee Stamford: there are many, many other properties on Keats that would benefit from this. And it's not saying

[1:38:58] Trustee Stamford: No, you cannot do it. It's just saying that when you are expanding your footprint, this is where we have the opportunity to look at how you're going to do it and where you're going to do it.

[1:39:14] Trustee Stamford: And then that provides that assurance, not just for the Island's Trust, but for your neighbors and everybody else, that they understand what's happening and we know that we can move forward in the best possible way.

[1:39:28] Trustee Stamford: this this whole development um process is not to remove all development from the foreshore it's to

[1:39:38] Trustee Stamford: reduce the impact as much as possible and by permitting additions and this is the one thing

[1:39:46] Trustee Stamford: everything else i'm i'm perfectly been working really hard to make those adjustments with you

[1:39:53] Trustee Stamford: it's the additions because that to me flies in the face of reducing as much as we can

[1:40:03] Trustee Stamford: development in the foreshore and if we are going to increase development then let's have a look

[1:40:08] Trustee Stamford: at it so we have more information not just to the local trust committee but to the neighbors and to

[1:40:15] Trustee Stamford: the community as a whole that this is the right thing for this area and it is i mean i'm not sure

[1:40:24] Trustee Stamford: how it would help keith's landing because they're so small they're looking into side lot setback

[1:40:31] Trustee Stamford: there's so many challenges um an addition shouldn't be a given in any scenario it's

[1:40:39] Trustee Stamford: It's something you've got to work towards and provide proper planning for.

[1:40:44] Trustee Stamford: I can't do an addition in my property.

[1:40:47] Trustee Stamford: I've got an acre.

[1:40:48] Trustee Stamford: I have to go through a variance because I live in the same area as in West Bay.

[1:40:55] Trustee Stamford: All these things are to provide the best move forward in what we see as sensitive ecosystems.

[1:41:04] Trustee Stamford: And foreshore area is sensitive.

[1:41:08] Trustee Stamford: It is something we have to protect.

[1:41:11] Trustee Stamford: So it's, I mean, I do understand.

[1:41:14] Trustee Stamford: I really do hear you.

[1:41:16] Trustee Stamford: I want to be there to listen to these residents.

[1:41:21] Trustee Stamford: And I do feel I've heard them.

[1:41:23] Trustee Stamford: And I do feel that we've moved the bar as far as we can to allow them to live on their area, enjoy their properties, and continue the communities that are so valuable on Keats.

[1:41:38] Trustee Stamford: But I do want to make sure this isn't just about Keats Landing. This is about all the properties outside of it as well.

[1:41:46] Trustee Stamford: So that's okay.

[1:41:55] Trustee Luckham: Just thinking about what I've heard here now.

[1:42:00] Trustee Luckham: I want to say one thing is we have listened to the members of the public and public hearing.

[1:42:08] Trustee Luckham: We're not having this conversation because we haven't listened.

[1:42:11] Trustee Luckham: It is a struggle. We don't necessarily agree.

[1:42:16] Trustee Luckham: And that is different. So we have listened. So let's just say that. We don't necessarily agree with the rationale and want to be inserting ourselves for sure into a process that is a good process.

[1:42:34] Trustee Luckham: process.

[1:42:41] Trustee Luckham: One of the things that we're attempting to do throughout the Federation, and Trustee

[1:42:47] Trustee Luckham: Stamford hinted about that with respect to her own island where she has limitations,

[1:42:53] Trustee Luckham: we are trying to create some uniformity across the island's trust area that meets a minimum

[1:42:58] Trustee Luckham: set of minimal standards that are perceived as reasonable.

[1:43:06] Trustee Luckham: and so certainly going beyond the seven and a half meter setback is one of those tenants that

[1:43:13] Trustee Luckham: is been acknowledged for some time as inadequate certainly there's a variation on this theme here

[1:43:21] Trustee Luckham: and i actually before i go anywhere i want to acknowledge right that trustee bernardo accepts

[1:43:28] Trustee Luckham: accepts, I think, the necessity for a development permit area, and that indeed we've moved that from

[1:43:36] Trustee Luckham: seven and a half meters to 15 meters for the most part. And that's a good thing, and I want to be

[1:43:44] Trustee Luckham: thankful for that. And so it makes me think, well, there's a couple of things. One, how many people

[1:43:53] Trustee Luckham: is this really impacting? When you mentioned a particular location on Keats, that's a group of

[1:43:59] Trustee Luckham: people. How many is that in relation to the entire population, number of dwellings? I don't know that

[1:44:05] Trustee Luckham: number. It would be interesting to know what that number is, but it's not necessarily important

[1:44:10] Trustee Luckham: either. I just want to echo that. So my question, where I'm sitting at this moment is acknowledging

[1:44:19] Trustee Luckham: that we're trying to up the standard across the entire federation for the same legitimate reason

[1:44:25] Trustee Luckham: and of moving development out of areas that should be protected.

[1:44:29] Trustee Luckham: On the amendments that we have before us, 540 square feet,

[1:44:34] Trustee Luckham: I prefer imperial measures, it just makes more sense to me,

[1:44:37] Trustee Luckham: is actually a pretty big addition.

[1:44:39] Trustee Luckham: It's half the size of my house.

[1:44:41] Trustee Luckham: It's not just a bedroom.

[1:44:44] Trustee Luckham: And so, and I don't know, and forgive me if I'm wrong,

[1:44:51] Trustee Luckham: if these are not full-time residences,

[1:44:54] Trustee Luckham: but are ostensibly maybe longer-term recreational properties

[1:45:00] Trustee Luckham: because I think I heard you say earlier

[1:45:02] Trustee Luckham: that, well, most people have closed up their houses.

[1:45:04] Trustee Luckham: And so it's not a full-time household that's living there

[1:45:11] Trustee Luckham: that might be compromised in their quality of life

[1:45:15] Trustee Luckham: because their building is only 500 square feet to begin with,

[1:45:18] Trustee Luckham: which would be a small, you know, a modest-sized cabin.

[1:45:22] Trustee Luckham: So, if 540 square feet is an unacceptable number in terms of an exemption, is there a number that could be offered to meet that requirement?

[1:45:39] Trustee Luckham: That might be the addition of a bedroom, which in my mind would be like 100 square feet.

[1:45:44] Trustee Luckham: And to some extent, I wonder, and this is a question now for the planning staff, is that building permits are not required for buildings in that 100 square foot zone, 10 by 10 or 3 by 3 meters or whatever it is generally throughout everywhere.

[1:46:02] Trustee Luckham: But admittedly, those buildings can't be created in a setback anyway, but that there's no permitting necessary for that.

[1:46:10] Trustee Luckham: And so, I'm just wondering, is there a number that's different than 540 square feet that might

[1:46:15] Trustee Luckham: be acceptable to everybody in order to advance this? And if not, if we expired this conversation

[1:46:22] Trustee Luckham: and this debate, then I do believe we just need to move on. But I would like to get an answer

[1:46:28] Trustee Luckham: on the question. A 10 by 10 addition, different from a structure like an electrical utility shed

[1:46:39] Trustee Luckham: or garage or small garage or something

[1:46:41] Trustee Luckham: that doesn't require a permitting process.

[1:46:44] Trustee Luckham: Is that a fair equivalency for an addition to a building

[1:46:53] Trustee Luckham: or does that just simply require a building permit

[1:46:55] Trustee Luckham: because the building is bigger than the 10 by 10 size?

[1:47:01] Trustee Luckham: Planner McCarver.

[1:47:06] Planner McCargar: I'd need a minute to look that up.

[1:47:08] Planner McCargar: I know, like you said,

[1:47:09] Planner McCargar: said, a building below 10 meter, under 10 meters squared does not require a building permit. But

[1:47:15] Planner McCargar: if it's an addition to a home, I would need to look that up. I think that it does require a

[1:47:21] Planner McCargar: building permit, but couldn't say that with complete certainty.

[1:47:25] Trustee Luckham: And so, yeah, so that's a

[1:47:27] Trustee Luckham: whole nother story then. But nonetheless, I think my question still stands, and I'm going to just

[1:47:33] Trustee Luckham: to ask trustee stanford is is a smaller number acceptable or is no number where we need to go

[1:47:39] Trustee Luckham: and then if trustee stanford says yay or nay um then i'd like to hear from trustee bernardo as

[1:47:47] Trustee Luckham: to whether or not there is a possibility for some movement there trustee stanford sorry to put you

[1:47:51] Trustee Luckham: in the position uh

[1:47:54] Trustee Stamford: yeah you put me in a tight position um the whole concept of an addition

[1:48:03] Trustee Stamford: in a setback okay without

[1:48:05] Trustee Stamford: any oversight yeah it

[1:48:08] Trustee Stamford: to me doesn't make sense right

[1:48:11] Voice 4: but given that

[1:48:13] Trustee Stamford: i want to hear what trustee bernardo has to say and i will reserve my decision on whether i'm for

[1:48:23] Trustee Stamford: or against that given that i do feel where we are being put over a barrel um and i don't like it

[1:48:30] Trustee Stamford: but that is reality this is you know happens to be the way that the gambier local trust committee

[1:48:38] Trustee Stamford: uh is comprised that we both quote unquote represent a specific island and i would hate

[1:48:46] Trustee Stamford: to be in a position where i'm voting against the island where this has the most impact because i

[1:48:52] Trustee Stamford: I am listening to the residents and I know that this is this is difficult I'm not I'm not brushing

[1:49:02] Trustee Stamford: this off in any way but yeah yeah

[1:49:07] Trustee Luckham: so apologies for that I'm looking at trying to find a path

[1:49:12] Trustee Luckham: forward where we can agree and at the moment we're not there Trustee Bernard did you have anything to

[1:49:20] Trustee Luckham: to add? Well, yeah,

[1:49:25] Voice 5: there's a lot there, Chair Luck, in your remarks, and trying to get them

[1:49:37] Voice 5: organized and in mind here. In no particular order, one of the things you said is that we're

[1:49:48] Voice 5: trying to raise standards across the trust area because the previous standards have been found to

[1:49:54] Voice 5: be inadequate. Again, that forces me to repeat a point as made before, which is there is no one

[1:50:01] Voice 5: size fits all. That's why we have 13 different local trust committees.

[1:50:08] Trustee Luckham: I'm struggling to catch

[1:50:10] Trustee Luckham: the details. So if I'm just going to say, can we just pause for a moment? I'm going to put another

[1:50:15] Trustee Luckham: external speaker on here to try and boost my volume because I'm guessing it must be my fault

[1:50:20] Trustee Luckham: here. And I don't know why that is. So just pause for a second.

[1:51:31] Voice 4: Sorry, bear with me.

[1:52:32] Trustee Luckham: Okay, let's

[1:52:33] Trustee Luckham: give that a try all

[1:52:36] Voice 5: right back again okay can you hear me all right now hello uh can you hear me

[1:52:48] Voice 5: peter

[1:52:48] Trustee Luckham: um can anybody can anybody hear me yes so can somebody say something i've been saying

[1:52:58] Trustee Luckham: something i'm not getting audio can

[1:53:01] Trustee Stamford: you hear me peter turn

[1:53:02] Trustee Luckham: it on that would help

[1:53:05] Trustee Luckham: one two three somebody say something one

[1:53:08] Trustee Stamford: two three say something okay

[1:53:14] Trustee Luckham: i okay so that's now on

[1:53:17] Trustee Luckham: uh somebody say something i'm saying something oh perfect that's great that's better volume now

[1:53:23] Trustee Luckham: thank you okay joe back to you okay

[1:53:26] Voice 5: uh there was a lot there as i was saying before peter and

[1:53:29] Voice 5: your remarks and uh also in trustee stanford's so um i tried to deal with the major ones one of the

[1:53:36] Voice 5: the things you said, Peter, is that we're trying to raise standards across the trust area.

[1:53:43] Voice 5: Who is we? There's 13, as I was saying, there's 13 different local trust committees, 13 different

[1:53:51] Voice 5: local trust areas. The reason we have those different committees is that the bylaws are

[1:53:55] Voice 5: supposed to be designed to address local conditions. So this business of trying to

[1:54:04] Voice 5: create uniform standards across the trust area that's not a given that's a that's controversial

[1:54:11] Voice 5: in every case no

[1:54:13] Voice 3: and

[1:54:14] Voice 5: uh we have to respect local conditions and if we don't then we have to ask

[1:54:21] Voice 5: ourselves why do we even exist why do we have a local trust committee and again uh it's you know

[1:54:29] Voice 5: uh you mentioned in passing um you know there seems to be between you and trustee stanford

[1:54:35] Voice 5: this kind of wanting to dismiss the residents of Keats Landing as kind of a minority. There's

[1:54:40] Voice 5: 100 plus lots over there.

[1:54:42] Trustee Luckham: Okay, well, that's what I needed to know. So thank you for that.

[1:54:47] Voice 5: It represents a population over there represents a significant number of the people who have

[1:54:52] Voice 5: shoreline properties. This, although I bring them up as the biggest example, the most important

[1:54:59] Voice 5: example about the sedition exemption and contemplating, they're not the only ones

[1:55:05] Voice 5: who are in the situation where they have houses that are within what will be DP3.

[1:55:14] Voice 5: What they are is the people who have fewer options than anybody else with respect to that.

[1:55:21] Voice 5: But the imposition of an unnecessary development purpose application requirement on anybody is wrong.

[1:55:29] Voice 5: And where we're differing is I'm hearing arguments that they're necessary for, you know, I could understand it, and I agree that areas land within DP3 that hasn't been previously developed or affected or disturbed, that DP3 serves a purpose to uphold the environmental integrity of that.

[1:55:57] Voice 5: but the reality is there has been this significant development on the coastline or the shoreline of

[1:56:04] Voice 5: keats island and when the land's already been developed the idea that we somehow need to have

[1:56:09] Voice 5: some oversight by staff that doesn't live there about what's supposed to be um an oversight over

[1:56:18] Voice 5: having to build an addition to a property that actually or to a house or a cabin that's already

[1:56:22] Voice 5: already there and the the idea of the addition is it can't tread into undeveloped land uh i'm not

[1:56:31] Voice 5: hearing a rational reason for for for that requirement uh it's a speculation that there's a

[1:56:41] Voice 5: risk but the point i keep trying to make is the risk has come and gone i mean this is developed

[1:56:49] Voice 5: land and i'm trying to strike a balance here and and when trustee stanford talks about feeling

[1:56:54] Voice 5: and she's over a barrel she has no idea it goes both ways uh i have to tell you coming in it would

[1:57:02] Voice 5: have been a lot easier for me earn all those things that i identified as needing changes

[1:57:09] Voice 5: it would have been a lot easier for me to say look this to turn that into an argument to say

[1:57:14] Voice 5: this is why these bylaws are inadequate and and and do not should not be passed they don't fit

[1:57:21] Voice 5: fit the community. There's just too many things in them that are a bad fit. I could have made

[1:57:28] Voice 5: that argument. It would have been easier for me to make an argument to just spike the whole thing.

[1:57:32] Voice 5: Instead, I've tried to work with it. I've tried to extract what I believed is in the interest of

[1:57:37] Voice 5: the community and what I believe that despite the annoyance of the community about this whole

[1:57:42] Voice 5: process, that if the whole business had been presented in a different way at the outset,

[1:57:50] Voice 5: said i i can i believe that the things that we've changed would probably have if properly

[1:57:57] Voice 5: communicated would probably have uh received a lot of support so i've tried to go in that direction

[1:58:04] Voice 5: to get past the kind of frankly uh resistance that is kind of hard uh hardwired now as a result

[1:58:14] Voice 5: of this process to try to get over it to try to make this thing the best thing it can be so um

[1:58:21] Voice 5: So like I said, planning is supposed to account for future development. The folks that keeps landing, they're certainly looking at that. And, you know, Trustee Stanford, of course, was involved in years of work to set that up so that those laws can eventually be turned over to freehold.

[1:58:38] Voice 5: So it comes down to this, really. It's not just this motion. It comes down to whether or not this LTC is going to be prepared to basically, at the end of the day, tell the people of Keech Island that, yeah, we've listened to you, but we don't agree.

[1:59:05] Voice 5: we think you're wrong and we're going to pass this stuff despite your best wishes and despite

[1:59:14] Voice 5: the judgment of the person who's supposed to represent you how that is uh how that's supposed

[1:59:22] Voice 5: to be any kind of example of representative democracy i have no idea makes a mockery of

[1:59:29] Voice 5: the whole public consultation process and it's basically setting us up as the great great experts

[1:59:33] Voice 5: we know better. And to me, that's just wrong.

[1:59:50] Trustee Luckham: Does that conclude your remarks?

[1:59:52] Voice 5: Yes, it does. Thank you.

[2:00:00] Trustee Luckham: Trustee Stanford?

[2:00:04] Trustee Stamford: I'm not sure why things that I'm saying very respectfully and with full

[2:00:10] Trustee Stamford: understanding and acknowledgement that we are listening to Keats Islanders is being construed

[2:00:19] Trustee Stamford: and twisted around that I'm just not listening. And I am the expert and I am this and it's again,

[2:00:25] Trustee Stamford: it's so unnecessarily um triggering it just is so unnecessary i have listened to this and we have

[2:00:35] Trustee Stamford: worked through a very difficult process for years and if i was non-respectful and not listening

[2:00:43] Trustee Stamford: i wouldn't be i would have been out of this a long time ago this is hard and we are trying to balance

[2:00:52] Trustee Stamford: the what we're hearing from the community and i too did not hear a lot of people say i would like

[2:01:01] Trustee Stamford: to be able to make a 500 square foot addition to my house in keats landing and i heard people

[2:01:11] Trustee Stamford: trying to go we would like to be able to afford our house in keats landing and to be able to

[2:01:18] Trustee Stamford: renovate it to a standard where it's safe and get that whole subdivision going so right now there's

[2:01:24] Trustee Stamford: not 110 lots there's one um and and we are working towards something that actually may not happen

[2:01:34] Trustee Stamford: because it's taken a very long time for them to get there and again we are providing we're moving

[2:01:41] Trustee Stamford: our um land planning process based on one section of Keith's Landing it is a big section it's an

[2:01:52] Trustee Stamford: an important section but it's got a whole lot of hurdles to go over before anyone in that

[2:01:58] Trustee Stamford: community is going to be able to look at this and go yeah i want to put in a 500 square foot

[2:02:03] Trustee Stamford: addition we have worked together on this all the way through and with respect this specific

[2:02:13] Trustee Stamford: thing about addition that's what i'm talking about which covers environmental processes

[2:02:21] Trustee Stamford: sees whether it's in disturbed or undisturbed land is irrelevant is the one issue and to expand it out

[2:02:31] Trustee Stamford: that i am disregarding everybody everywhere because i am putting my principles down on this

[2:02:41] Trustee Stamford: one point of 500 square foot addition i think is totally unnecessary we do not need to corner me

[2:02:51] Trustee Stamford: into that i do not it just it just we can keep working on this but now i'm like well why should

[2:03:00] Trustee Stamford: i because this is where the distinction has gotten in this one thing which was additions

[2:03:08] Trustee Stamford: everything else i've been working with you on this and i do not know why this one specific issue

[2:03:15] Trustee Stamford: is the one that you're holding on when there's so many other things that we can work on

[2:03:21] Trustee Stamford: And there's so many other benefits potentially to this bylaw.

[2:03:26] Trustee Stamford: So, you know, I came in here with good intention and an open mind.

[2:03:34] Trustee Stamford: And it's the language that's being used.

[2:03:39] Trustee Stamford: I'm not sure I want to participate in this.

[2:03:44] Trustee Stamford: It doesn't need to go in this direction ever.

[2:03:47] Trustee Stamford: And when we're talking about, you know, we're trying to do basic standards.

[2:03:53] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, we are.

[2:03:54] Trustee Stamford: And I think there are there can be some basic standards, whether you agree with them or not, is a different question. But to question my integrity, because I happen to agree with a standard, just as I would if, you know, we're supposed to have certain standards on a dock.

[2:04:13] Trustee Stamford: I'm not an expert I'm hoping that there would be somebody that would give me certain standards that

[2:04:18] Trustee Stamford: yes go across the islands and I don't think we have to have specific what's good for me what's

[2:04:26] Trustee Stamford: good for you on every single item I think the the provincial government said minimum standard

[2:04:32] Trustee Stamford: 15 meter setback on the ocean minimum I think that's okay to work with I think that's something

[2:04:40] Trustee Stamford: to work towards. Yes, there's going to be differences to that, but that to me is something

[2:04:47] Trustee Stamford: worth working towards. It has overall benefits for the environment, for the communities against

[2:04:55] Trustee Stamford: potential flooding, for climate change. It's something to work towards. I don't want to

[2:05:01] Trustee Stamford: disregard it. In the end, all this is about is a 500 square foot addition. That's what it is. It's

[2:05:10] Trustee Stamford: not my attitude it's not yours that is the crux of the matter thanks go

[2:05:19] Trustee Luckham: ahead joe yeah i realized

[2:05:22] Voice 5: i didn't answer your question before peter which was about the size of the addition that i have in

[2:05:27] Voice 5: mind right i'm

[2:05:30] Voice 5: just like my whole theme here is i'm trying to be practical and 10 by 10 my

[2:05:37] Voice 5: understanding of it is i have a recollection looking actually the scrd bylaws i i could be

[2:05:43] Voice 5: you're wrong, but I do think your original instinct is correct. I don't think a building

[2:05:47] Voice 5: permit is required for a 10 by 10 addition or any construction. Anything over that, I think you do

[2:05:54] Voice 5: need a building permit. To answer your question, yes, my mind is open to a friendly amendment to

[2:06:04] Voice 5: change the number if it's practical. You say 10 by 10 is enough to add a bedroom. That strikes me

[2:06:15] Voice 5: me is um when i when i consider the scale of some of the things that have to be done to some of

[2:06:22] Voice 5: these places uh reasonably over on top of a lawn or a patio that's already there uh 10 by 10 is

[2:06:32] Voice 5: too low if you think 500 is too high my mind's open as i mentioned at the outset of this last

[2:06:41] Voice 5: time when i introduced the motion i recognize the numbers arbitrary to some extent i don't have the

[2:06:46] Voice 5: expertise to figure out what is or frankly have can't and are unable to survey every property

[2:06:54] Voice 5: out there to figure out what would be the reasonable number but if we can set aside the

[2:07:00] Voice 5: number i mean we can get to a number if we can if we can accept the principle that we need to have

[2:07:07] Voice 5: some flexibility here in terms of additions that it's harmless to let people add additions on

[2:07:14] Voice 5: property that's their property that they've always been able to work with that is outside of the 7.5

[2:07:22] Voice 5: meters which is the the most critical level but uh you know above that and within the 15 meters

[2:07:31] Voice 5: where they already have their homes where they frankly were talking about them making use of

[2:07:35] Voice 5: their yards that they're already using in a slightly different way so uh it's the principle

[2:07:42] Voice 5: that matters here. If we can agree on the principle that some level of addition isn't

[2:07:47] Voice 5: unreasonable, then it just becomes a matter of agreeing to a number. So yes, I'd be happy to

[2:07:54] Voice 5: participate in that debate, but it's the principle that I'm arguing for here. And I'm sorry that

[2:08:03] Voice 5: Trustee Sanford is interpreting my remarks as being personal attacks. They are not. They're

[2:08:10] Voice 5: They're not intended to be personal attacks at all.

[2:08:12] Voice 5: What I'm really trying to tell you is how I believe this will be received if we don't fully acknowledge what the actual needs of the people there are.

[2:08:27] Voice 5: That's what it comes down to.

[2:08:32] Voice 5: My whole experience has been I've received a lot of comments from people that are supportive of the direction I've been going.

[2:08:42] Voice 5: um i haven't really received too many that are against it so again i appreciate that these are

[2:08:53] Voice 5: anecdotal and it's impossible to know whether it's fully representative but as i said before

[2:08:59] Voice 5: just like the public hearing process that's all i've got to work with and uh the frustration i'm

[2:09:08] Voice 5: hearing is mingled with a substantial amount of bewilderment people who have had these properties

[2:09:16] Voice 5: for generations are wondering why is it that the thing that the islands trust says it wants to

[2:09:25] Voice 5: protect it's only here because of what my family has done we didn't put in a tennis court we didn't

[2:09:32] Voice 5: do this or that this foreshore you're trying to protect they've been protecting it all these years

[2:09:39] Voice 5: and now we're coming in because we've got some sort of supposed expertise here we we actually

[2:09:45] Voice 5: don't at the trust what we're doing is following direction that we're getting from other areas

[2:09:49] Voice 5: that's not unreasonable to do provided that we take into account the local condition

[2:09:55] Voice 5: so anyhow i'm again i'm repeating myself because i actually don't have much else to say here

[2:10:01] Voice 5: so uh but going back to your other point peter yes if there's any room to accept a principle

[2:10:09] Voice 5: for a lower number i'd be all ears to do that because i'm i'd be happy to proceed with that

[2:10:14] Voice 5: compromise uh there you have it

[2:10:19] Trustee Luckham: okay i think we should have lunch break um but i want to use that

[2:10:27] Trustee Luckham: time and space to create a buffer between the conversation we've had in the conversation

[2:10:32] Trustee Luckham: that we're going to have after we return i'm going to apologize for my part in

[2:10:40] Trustee Luckham: kate putting you in a difficult position and question and framing questions that

[2:10:53] Trustee Luckham: maybe could be brought up in a different manner so i just want to say that i share

[2:11:00] Trustee Luckham: okay

[2:11:01] Trustee Stamford: i'm a big girl yeah

[2:11:02] Trustee Luckham: well yeah but that shouldn't necessarily be necessary

[2:11:07] Trustee Luckham: um so thank you joe for suggesting that there's possibly a conversation i you know and it's naive

[2:11:17] Trustee Luckham: to think that there is a conversation on my part not on yours but on my part because

[2:11:21] Trustee Luckham: because if there's a number, it isn't going to exceed 10 by 10. But others say that. And so

[2:11:29] Trustee Luckham: let's reflect on those elements and reflect on how we're going to communicate better to each other.

[2:11:34] Trustee Luckham: But the biggest question that I think I have, Joe, and it's for you, is what do you disagree with?

[2:11:45] Trustee Luckham: And let's come back after the lunch, just so it's a time to reflect on it. And I'll reflect

[2:11:48] Trustee Luckham: reflect on the question I'm asking. What do you disagree with, with the necessity to apply

[2:11:53] Trustee Luckham: for a development variance permit? Because we're not saying, no, you can't build a 500 square foot

[2:12:02] Trustee Luckham: addition. We're saying we want some professional reports and we want to be involved in that

[2:12:06] Trustee Luckham: planning. So let's have a break and come back. And I'm going to push us to move towards a vote.

[2:12:14] Trustee Luckham: and i see that planner mccarver has her hand up yeah

[2:12:20] Planner McCargar: i just wanted to add before we go on a break

[2:12:22] Planner McCargar: just clarification for maybe members of the public but because i'm hearing a lot of 15 meters

[2:12:28] Planner McCargar: seven and a half meters development variance permits development permits and i just wanted

[2:12:33] Planner McCargar: to clear up so 15 meters is the development permit area so any development just uh disturbance

[2:12:43] Planner McCargar: would require a development permit within that 15-meter area.

[2:12:48] Planner McCargar: Early on in this project, the LTC responded to major community concern about a,

[2:12:57] Planner McCargar: originally there was a building setback of 15 meters.

[2:13:01] Planner McCargar: So that meant that any building built within that 15,

[2:13:08] Planner McCargar: like you would need a development permit and a DVP and a development variance permit.

[2:13:14] Planner McCargar: Early on in the process, the LTC responded to community concern and changed the building setback to seven and a half meters.

[2:13:23] Planner McCargar: So I just wanted to be clear on that.

[2:13:26] Planner McCargar: So any building between seven and a half meters and 15 meters does not require a development variance permit.

[2:13:34] Planner McCargar: It will still require a development permit, but there would be no variance required.

[2:13:39] Planner McCargar: The land use bylaw regulations are staying the same in that a building can be built seven

[2:13:45] Planner McCargar: and a half meters from the natural boundary of the sea.

[2:13:48] Trustee Luckham: With a permit?

[2:13:50] Planner McCargar: With a development permit.

[2:13:52] Trustee Luckham: Yeah.

[2:13:52] Trustee Luckham: So thank you.

[2:13:53] Trustee Luckham: I confused that language.

[2:13:54] Trustee Luckham: If

[2:13:55] Planner McCargar: someone wanted to build between zero meters and seven and a half meters, that would require

[2:14:00] Planner McCargar: a development permit and a development variance permit.

[2:14:03] Trustee Luckham: Correct.

[2:14:03] Trustee Luckham: And in fact, we saw that today. Yes, the previous application. It's a it's an you couldn't have planned it better. Actually, that's a good example for us. So let's come back at 1245. And I think we have to cut to the chase and advance this. I don't think we can drag this out any longer. So please come back.

[2:45:02] Voice 4: Hello, everyone.

[2:45:21] Trustee Luckham: Just waiting for the others here, I guess.

[2:45:24] Voice 5: Yes, sir.

[2:45:34] Voice 9: It's Marlos. Thank you for coming. I see Jason Yeomans has joined us.

[2:46:33] Trustee Luckham: So, Jason, thank you for joining us. We're a little bit behind in our schedule.

[2:46:47] Trustee Luckham: And I don't know what to offer at this moment in time. But I do think, as I said before we

[2:46:53] Trustee Luckham: we went to the break, I think we need to conclude this conversation. So you're welcome to observe.

[2:46:58] Trustee Luckham: Thank you, Chair.

[2:47:00] Trustee Luckham: So thank you for everybody, members of the public, returning to our meeting here. We are on

[2:47:07] Trustee Luckham: Section 9.2, Minor Projects, Keech Shoreline Protection Project, post-public hearing,

[2:47:13] Trustee Luckham: of course, page 144 of the package. We've had a very deep and meaningful conversation, I think,

[2:47:19] Trustee Luckham: this morning and I'm just going to ask if there are any further reflections on

[2:47:26] Trustee Luckham: what we discussed this morning and we have a motion that we brought back from being tabled

[2:47:36] Trustee Luckham: from our previous meeting regarding some amendments from Trustee Bernardo and that is

[2:47:41] Trustee Luckham: here for our consideration at this time. Any further reflections?

[2:47:47] Voice 5: Well before we broke Peter

[2:47:49] Voice 5: Peter, you asked me a question and asked me to think about it during the break and provide my response now.

[2:47:56] Voice 5: And I'm ready to do that.

[2:47:57] Trustee Luckham: Thank you. I appreciate that.

[2:48:02] Voice 5: You asked me, why do I object to the DP3 requirement?

[2:48:07] Voice 5: I don't object to it.

[2:48:12] Voice 5: It's a layered piece of business.

[2:48:15] Voice 5: I'm fine with effectively closing off the 7.5 meter zone from the natural boundary of the sea.

[2:48:21] Voice 5: I'm fine with closing that off to development as the bylaw contemplates.

[2:48:27] Voice 5: I'm also fine with imposing a DP requirement for development between the 7.5 and 15 meter area.

[2:48:34] Voice 5: When it will serve to provide useful oversight of any proposed development that would encroach on undisturbed native habitat.

[2:48:47] Voice 5: type. Looking at it in that narrow fashion, that will actually provide an added layer of useful

[2:48:57] Voice 5: protection that will apply to virtually every shoreline property on the island, except the

[2:49:03] Voice 5: leasehold properties at Keats Island, where the relevant land is pretty much all already developed.

[2:49:10] Voice 5: So, you know, when I've been very frustrated when I hear these remarks, which is like, well,

[2:49:15] Voice 5: well, you know, if you give the guy this exemption he wants,

[2:49:19] Voice 5: it's just going to completely undermine the whole thing.

[2:49:22] Voice 5: Well, that's not true.

[2:49:25] Voice 5: It will add the layer of protection you referred to.

[2:49:28] Voice 5: What I object to is imposing the requirement

[2:49:31] Voice 5: when it hasn't been established

[2:49:34] Voice 5: that it will do much more than impose

[2:49:37] Voice 5: an unnecessary burden on residents

[2:49:40] Voice 5: by forcing them to require

[2:49:43] Voice 5: to go through the development permit process

[2:49:45] Voice 5: and everything that entails without really that process meaningfully adding

[2:49:53] Voice 5: anything to environmental protection. Again, let's remember what we're talking

[2:49:59] Voice 5: about here. We're talking about the immediate area around a dwelling that's

[2:50:04] Voice 5: already being actively used. So requiring a DP requirement for additions to

[2:50:13] Voice 5: pre-existing dwellings won't make much difference environmentally i objections i've heard to my

[2:50:21] Voice 5: argument here really at the end of the day are speculative i have yet to hear any risks being

[2:50:27] Voice 5: actually concrete risks being identified except the speculative one that's all too complicated

[2:50:31] Voice 5: to leave to the judgment of residents and that's what it adds up to it's just like i'm actually

[2:50:37] Voice 5: surprised you know i'm sort of surprised and not surprised at the level of resistance here

[2:50:42] Voice 5: But my deep frustration here is I haven't heard a real concrete reason or explanation of what the protection, that requirement in that context would deliver.

[2:50:57] Voice 5: And that's why I object to it.

[2:51:03] Voice 5: That's all I've got to say in terms of responding to your question.

[2:51:07] Trustee Luckham: Yeah.

[2:51:08] Trustee Luckham: Well, you answered the question despite the way you started off.

[2:51:13] Trustee Luckham: Maybe it didn't sound like I articulated the question correctly.

[2:51:17] Trustee Luckham: But my original question, and I think it's what you said stands, was what's the objection to applying for a development permit if you wanted to build an addition of 540 square feet on your dwelling?

[2:51:36] Trustee Luckham: But you've answered that, I think.

[2:51:41] Trustee Luckham: So thank you.

[2:51:46] Trustee Luckham: Kate Louise, where are you at?

[2:51:48] Trustee Luckham: i

[2:51:53] Trustee Stamford: think i've responded enough to those particular concerns um i'm i think the expertise to determine

[2:52:04] Trustee Stamford: that is is not with either of us so i'm just gonna leave it at that yeah

[2:52:16] Voice 5: all right can i

[2:52:18] Voice 5: chair yep can i ask jesse sanford to clarify what she means about not having expertise i feel like

[2:52:32] Trustee Stamford: I've talked this around and around, just like the expertise that is required to determine whether

[2:52:38] Trustee Stamford: something is impactful on the environment or not, which you by principle are leaving with the

[2:52:50] Trustee Stamford: landholder. I feel that very expertise should be with somebody like a QEP for things such as

[2:53:01] Trustee Stamford: additions additions cover land and whether or not you agree with the the processes of disturbed

[2:53:12] Trustee Stamford: uncovered land or not that's a different argument but i don't have the expertise nor do you to

[2:53:20] Trustee Stamford: determine whether or not there's impact on that land when you cover it with a structure okay

[2:53:40] Trustee Luckham: so

[2:53:42] Trustee Luckham: So, I'm not sure that, I guess, I'm going to be unable to articulate why I continue

[2:54:03] Trustee Luckham: to want to not support this bylaw or amendment.

[2:54:12] Trustee Luckham: But at the same time, I want to support it.

[2:54:16] Trustee Luckham: But I think it comes down to why we're so concerned about creating an addition to a

[2:54:26] Trustee Luckham: building that already sits on undisturbed land um that's

[2:54:34] Voice 5: a point of clarification it's not

[2:54:36] Voice 5: undisturbed it's it sits on disturbed land oh

[2:54:40] Trustee Luckham: sorry yeah no you're absolutely that's what i

[2:54:42] Trustee Luckham: meant so why are we so concerned about providing the opportunity for an addition on disturbed

[2:54:49] Trustee Luckham: previously disturbed land. And I think one of the elements that is significant in this is

[2:55:03] Trustee Luckham: what do we mean by disturbed land? Where I live here on Thetis for 35, no, we're coming up,

[2:55:18] Trustee Luckham: well, 35 years, we'll call it. Areas that have been disturbed land have regrown into something

[2:55:29] Trustee Luckham: something else. And I sort of think that Keats is probably not any different than any place on

[2:55:37] Trustee Luckham: Thetis or Pender or anywhere else. Pre-contact, I'll just say, it's a long time ago, but it's

[2:55:46] Trustee Luckham: not forever, but it is a long time ago in our context. The forests went all the way to the

[2:55:55] Trustee Luckham: the shorelines for the most part certainly there was meadows and other things and there was

[2:56:03] Trustee Luckham: traditional burning practices and the like but um the forest line essentially went down to the water

[2:56:12] Trustee Luckham: line and you and you know joe you travel around in a boat you see that in lots of places

[2:56:17] Trustee Luckham: and you see uh development uh from the water line that's also happened and i think if the

[2:56:26] Trustee Luckham: if the disturbed land remains undeveloped for any period of time, and granted, it might be that

[2:56:34] Trustee Luckham: there's continuous development that happens simply by occupying the land. But in those

[2:56:41] Trustee Luckham: situations where there's some question about how much a piece of land has managed to self-rejuvenate

[2:56:50] Trustee Luckham: itself, I think becomes a technical question about the merits of continuing further disturbance of

[2:56:58] Trustee Luckham: that potentially rejuvenated land, which I think does come down to a qualified environmental

[2:57:05] Trustee Luckham: professional assessment. And I tend to want to leave because as Kate has indicated, I too am

[2:57:13] Trustee Luckham: not an expert in these matters. And I'm always surprised by two things, actually. One, a qualified

[2:57:19] Trustee Luckham: if I had environmental professionals' assessment of a particular location, and a First Nations

[2:57:24] Trustee Luckham: elder that comes and tells me about a location, and those things that have changed since impact.

[2:57:32] Trustee Luckham: And so I think that if we're trying to mitigate anything, it's a continuation of a process of

[2:57:38] Trustee Luckham: ongoing degradation. I don't know how to articulate that in a better way. I'm not necessarily trying

[2:57:47] Trustee Luckham: to convince you. I'm just trying to provide a rationale for supporting the motion or not.

[2:57:55] Trustee Luckham: And I guess if I just spoke in the contrary for a minute, and if I was to support,

[2:58:01] Trustee Luckham: wanting to support the motion, sure, you've identified an area between seven and a half

[2:58:09] Trustee Luckham: meters and 15 meters. You're still respecting the area below the seven and a half meters.

[2:58:14] Trustee Luckham: and that's good and you know certainly understand that you um understand the rationale for that and

[2:58:23] Trustee Luckham: support it um i don't understand what the difficulty is with although i know i guess i

[2:58:33] Trustee Luckham: know why but i don't fully understand it is why we can't have individuals apply for a development

[2:58:46] Trustee Luckham: permit in order to undertake an activity which there may be professional knowledge that may be

[2:58:54] Trustee Luckham: beneficial to protecting the natural environment, which is, whether people like it or not, it is

[2:59:04] Trustee Luckham: the mandate of the Honest Trust to preserve and protect the natural environment.

[2:59:09] Trustee Luckham: So, I don't know. I guess I'm inclining, unless I get a good answer about what's wrong with

[2:59:17] Trustee Luckham: having to shell out the money to get a hire a professional and get a report to say yeah you

[2:59:25] Trustee Luckham: could build that 540 50 square feet 40 square foot structure on that location it's not going

[2:59:30] Trustee Luckham: to make any difference to the natural environment and i would support a development experience that

[2:59:36] Trustee Luckham: came forward like that so i see two hands up i'm not sure who had their hand up first

[2:59:41] Trustee Luckham: first happy to hear

[2:59:42] Voice 4: yeah and

[2:59:44] Trustee Luckham: then i think i'm just going to call the vote and we're going to

[2:59:46] Trustee Luckham: have to jump in

[2:59:47] Trustee Stamford: um one of the things that keeps coming up is is we're in some way insulting

[2:59:54] Trustee Stamford: keats people that have been there for three generations and have taken care of their land

[2:59:58] Voice 4: yeah that

[3:00:00] Trustee Stamford: is not what land planning is about those very same people that are caring so much for the land and

[3:00:07] Trustee Stamford: they do sell their land and maybe it doesn't happen in your neighborhood joe but that doesn't

[3:00:15] Trustee Stamford: that's not how land planning works and part of the reason this is all coming forward is there

[3:00:22] Trustee Stamford: has been increased turnover on keats and there has been an increase of difficulties around the

[3:00:29] Trustee Stamford: foreshore and structures going up in the foreshore and hardening of the foreshore and things that are

[3:00:36] Trustee Stamford: difficult for the people that remain to see those kind of changes move ahead. There is a risk

[3:00:44] Trustee Stamford: by just allowing this continued development in the foreshore that the very processes that we're

[3:00:54] Trustee Stamford: trying to protect as an island and we have respected over three generations will no longer

[3:01:01] Trustee Stamford: function as the growth continues and the change continues it is happening and that's where we

[3:01:08] Trustee Stamford: came from at the very beginning was an increase in structures in the foreshore i would hate to

[3:01:16] Trustee Stamford: to see this fail on a concept of a, an addition to a building. An addition to the building is a

[3:01:30] Trustee Stamford: significant part of planning. It does change the environment. If somebody built a 540 square foot

[3:01:39] Trustee Stamford: building beside me or an addition, I'd want to know about it. And part of this is the public

[3:01:46] Trustee Stamford: process that we go in with a variance to move it forward. Does this work for the neighbors? And we

[3:01:53] Trustee Stamford: can't assume neighbors are going to get along. EATS is known for that. They know people that

[3:01:58] Trustee Stamford: are having huge difficulties with their neighbors. But I just want to focus on the planning part of

[3:02:04] Trustee Stamford: it. This is moving forward regardless of who owns the property. It's that ability to provide

[3:02:12] Trustee Stamford: some structure on how development moves in those areas and i just can't get my head around the idea

[3:02:21] Trustee Stamford: that additions everything else i've been fine about but additions specifically is one step too

[3:02:30] Trustee Stamford: far in against the whole principle of what we started with was to try and protect the foreshore

[3:02:38] Trustee Stamford: in this this whole project seven years i mean i don't expect to change anyone's mind either

[3:02:47] Trustee Stamford: but i just have to say this is where i'm coming thank

[3:02:51] Trustee Luckham: you kate uh you're done so i'll go to joe

[3:02:56] Voice 5: all right thanks um i want to try to address your uh lingering concern here peter what i'm

[3:03:08] Voice 5: really talking about at the end of the day is we're trying to strike a balance between rights

[3:03:13] Voice 5: of property owners and they do exist in environmental protection.

[3:03:20] Voice 5: It's not, I'm not blind to the fact that having a blanket development purpose application process

[3:03:28] Voice 5: without the exemption I'm talking about would add a layer of environmental protection even there,

[3:03:34] Voice 5: even when it's a question of an addition. My point is it's marginal to the point of being

[3:03:40] Voice 5: not helpful

[3:03:41] Voice 4: and

[3:03:42] Voice 5: the cost of time money and inconvenience is not trivial to

[3:03:49] Voice 5: people the uncertainty is difficult and I don't think it's the right thing to

[3:03:57] Voice 5: impose such a thing on people unless it's necessary the disagreement here is

[3:04:02] Voice 5: I don't believe it's necessary in this context and trustee Stanford and

[3:04:09] Voice 5: yourself peter seem to think it is now i i i want us to be really clear about something like no

[3:04:19] Voice 5: matter how this vote goes that we're really clear here that i get like this amendment you know some

[3:04:25] Voice 5: of the language here bothers me that's being used because it's a bit too sweeping my amendment is

[3:04:30] Voice 5: not um an idea here to give a complete free hand to development on any undisturbed land within that

[3:04:37] Voice 5: 7.5 to 15 meter zone yeah that is

[3:04:41] Trustee Luckham: that is clear joe yeah okay

[3:04:43] Voice 5: thank you well

[3:04:44] Trustee Luckham: with some of this

[3:04:45] Trustee Luckham: bullet three and a bullet one are excellent but it's

[3:04:51] Trustee Luckham: bullet two that's the problem

[3:04:53] Voice 5: well remind me what bullet two is oh

[3:04:57] Trustee Luckham: so so the motion uh includes on bullet two the addition

[3:05:00] Trustee Luckham: does not exceed 550 square feet okay

[3:05:03] Voice 5: well as i mentioned before if somebody's got a winning

[3:05:08] Voice 5: number that they could live with, I'd be all ears. But to be clear about something,

[3:05:14] Voice 5: I want to be clear on something I should have clarified before, which is the disturbed land

[3:05:18] Voice 5: concept is actually not original with me. And I can't tell you exactly where I saw it

[3:05:22] Voice 5: within the original version of the bylaws I've been working with. I think it's somewhere near

[3:05:25] Voice 5: the back end. But it's language that was originally within the bylaw. That's my recollection.

[3:05:35] Voice 5: and uh what i'm talking about here is you know land that's um you know peter many remarks were

[3:05:43] Voice 5: about look undisturbed land comes back you know and it's not necessarily you know uh you know it

[3:05:49] Voice 5: may be in fact a representative natural habitat by now i'm not talking about that at all because

[3:05:57] Voice 5: if we think about it i'm only talking about land that is by definition being actively used because

[3:06:03] Voice 5: because it's right beside a dwelling that's actively being used.

[3:06:07] Voice 5: Again, we're talking about people's yards,

[3:06:09] Voice 5: not talking about 200 feet away,

[3:06:12] Voice 5: some lot that got, you know,

[3:06:13] Voice 5: something that was cleared and messed up,

[3:06:15] Voice 5: you know, 70 years ago and it's grown back.

[3:06:17] Voice 5: That's not what we're talking about.

[3:06:18] Voice 5: We're talking about the land that is immediately around somebody's dwelling

[3:06:22] Voice 5: that's being used right now.

[3:06:23] Voice 5: People are stomping around it all the time.

[3:06:27] Voice 5: That's where I, that's where the balance to me seems wrong.

[3:06:31] Voice 5: uh so

[3:06:34] Trustee Luckham: can i just remark

[3:06:35] Trustee Luckham: on that particular thing because i think that's significant

[3:06:37] Trustee Luckham: well let

[3:06:39] Voice 5: me let me just add one thing which is as you pointed out i mean we've been going in

[3:06:44] Voice 5: circles about this but i mean if as i said before if there's some attempt if there's some effort

[3:06:53] Voice 5: that we can undergo here to change the number fine let's have that discussion if we can't get

[3:06:59] Voice 5: there that way um and this motion is defeated then i would ask us to consider developing guidelines

[3:07:09] Voice 5: that mitigate uh what i believe is unnecessary uh burden on people who need to put on additions

[3:07:18] Voice 5: like guidelines for additions to make it more of a streamlined process where um if a qep is required

[3:07:26] Voice 5: there's not just a big sweeping amount of issues have to be looked at that it's just a much more

[3:07:31] Voice 5: narrow, disciplined process that makes it easier for the applicant. But my first preference is to

[3:07:36] Voice 5: have this exemption because I think it's the cleanest way to go. Thank you.

[3:07:46] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Thank you, Joe. And thank you for that recognition that there's potentially

[3:07:54] Trustee Luckham: additional work associated with guidelines. Typically, I'm going to digress if I go down

[3:08:02] Trustee Luckham: on that avenue. Just I'm going to acknowledge that. So I think the reason to ask people to go

[3:08:10] Trustee Luckham: for a development permit in a protected zone, area, region, whatever you want to call it,

[3:08:19] Trustee Luckham: is because of the very things that you said that, oh, that 70-year-old garage or this other area

[3:08:30] Trustee Luckham: that's getting this sort of thing, you know, and I think about, well, seedlings and moss and things

[3:08:35] Trustee Luckham: that have actually managed to recover and that admittedly is maybe lightly trod upon as opposed

[3:08:40] Trustee Luckham: to being built on top of. I think that that's where the qualified environmental professional

[3:08:47] Trustee Luckham: point of view comes in that says, you know, you can tear that garage down and forget about it

[3:08:53] Trustee Luckham: and rebuild on that site or expand that area where that lean-to on the side of the building

[3:08:59] Trustee Luckham: isn't going to make any impact. But there might be another area where the person with their

[3:09:04] Trustee Luckham: skill set is going to say, oh, well, you probably didn't notice that the water is trickling through

[3:09:10] Trustee Luckham: here, and there's this thing going on in this system, and it should be protected. And so

[3:09:16] Trustee Luckham: therefore, if you want to make this addition, we would suggest you move it to the south side of

[3:09:21] Trustee Luckham: the building instead of the north side of the building or something like that, right? I think

[3:09:25] Trustee Luckham: that's the level of professional advice that we're looking for, because I don't think that we are all

[3:09:31] Trustee Luckham: knowing for sure. And I doubt to some extent that all landowners necessarily have that skill set

[3:09:39] Trustee Luckham: either. And so the reason for having a permitting process is to give that certainty and certainly

[3:09:47] Trustee Luckham: guidelines around it, because I don't think the expectation is that you would have to do 50

[3:09:52] Trustee Luckham: things. I think that there's two or three things. And so maybe we do need to be specific about that.

[3:09:59] Trustee Luckham: So I would enjoy looking at that and thinking about how that might come to pass. But I think

[3:10:10] Trustee Luckham: buried in there, and I hope you can see the glimmer of it, that there's a rationale in what

[3:10:16] Trustee Luckham: you've said for having a QEP evaluate where it is and how it is that that particular piece of

[3:10:22] Trustee Luckham: development is going to happen on that disturbed land um anyway that's um i thank you for it um

[3:10:35] Trustee Luckham: i'm inclined to want to call the vote are you ready to vote go ahead joe uh

[3:10:41] Voice 5: i thought trustee

[3:10:43] Voice 5: had a hand up but apparently not i

[3:10:45] Trustee Luckham: don't see it no okay

[3:10:47] Voice 5: yes i mean i we've we've beaten this thing

[3:10:50] Voice 5: to death. Yeah,

[3:10:51] Trustee Luckham: I think you're right. Thank you. So, therefore, I'm going to read it out just for

[3:10:57] Trustee Luckham: the record. Therefore, the motion that's on the floor is that the Gamber Island Local Trust

[3:11:03] Trustee Luckham: Committee amend, it doesn't actually say this, but amend the proposed bylaw number 154 by

[3:11:11] Trustee Luckham: insertion of the following exemption as subsection 9.3.2 subsection C,

[3:11:19] Trustee Luckham: colon. Quote, additions to pre-existing building structures and utilities situated between seven

[3:11:25] Trustee Luckham: and a half meters and 15 meters from the natural boundary of the sea provided always that no part

[3:11:31] Trustee Luckham: of the work may involve use of earth moving machinery or the removal of native tree species

[3:11:36] Trustee Luckham: to the addition does not exceed 50 square meters in area and must be erected on previously disturbed

[3:11:42] Trustee Luckham: disturbed land, semicolon, and the work does not result in environmental degradation of any

[3:11:50] Trustee Luckham: kind, anywhere within DP3 or to the ecology of the foreshore. That's the motion. And so

[3:12:04] Trustee Luckham: I'm going to call the vote on the motion. All those in favor. So please lower your hand.

[3:12:13] Trustee Luckham: And all those opposed.

[3:12:15] Trustee Luckham: So it's two opposed.

[3:12:17] Trustee Luckham: I'm afraid that that fails despite the admirable effort, Joe.

[3:12:25] Trustee Luckham: So now I think that brings us back to the bylaws as presented.

[3:12:33] Trustee Luckham: And I do believe, and I'll turn to planning staff to correct me if I'm wrong,

[3:12:38] Trustee Luckham: the opportunity exists to provide third reading.

[3:12:43] Voice 5: Before we do that, may I make another motion?

[3:12:46] Trustee Luckham: Absolutely.

[3:12:49] Voice 5: My motion would be this.

[3:12:50] Voice 5: I referred to guidelines before.

[3:12:52] Voice 5: My concern, pardon my concerns,

[3:12:56] Voice 5: and my motion is that I move that staff be requested

[3:13:05] Voice 5: to develop draft guidelines applicable to development.

[3:13:09] Voice 5: Sorry, I'll start over.

[3:13:11] Voice 5: I move that staff be requested to develop draft guidelines

[3:13:15] Voice 5: applicable to development permit applications

[3:13:19] Voice 5: made by applicants seeking to build additions

[3:13:22] Voice 5: to pre-existing dwellings within DP3.

[3:13:27] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Thank you, Joe.

[3:13:29] Trustee Luckham: So I'm going to ask Lisa if she has been able to record that adequately

[3:13:34] Trustee Luckham: and maybe put it up on the screen.

[3:13:37] Trustee Luckham: And while we're waiting for that, I want to ask staff a question.

[3:13:44] Trustee Luckham: And then I'll seek a seconder once we've got it up on the screen.

[3:13:47] Trustee Luckham: So the question would be, the guidelines necessary to do this, and it's a reasonable idea, would those have to be embedded in the OCP, or can they be independent of that, and therefore can we advance the OCP and LUB at this time, and have you develop those guidelines either once we've concluded that process, or otherwise?

[3:14:15] Trustee Luckham: Why don't you please advise me on the process for developing guidelines associated with this OCP and LUB?

[3:14:21] Planner McCargar: Well, if there are guidelines related to the DPA specifically, then it would make the most sense, I think, to have the guidelines within the DPA.

[3:14:32] Planner McCargar: There's a host of other guidelines listed in there, so I'm not exactly clear on what those would look like, what the trustees are proposing.

[3:14:42] Planner McCargar: proposing. If they were more general, I suppose they could be added as another minor project

[3:14:49] Planner McCargar: and the LTC could consider that separately.

[3:14:54] Trustee Luckham: Right. So we could do this independent of this

[3:15:02] Trustee Luckham: particular OCP and LUB amendment at this time, or we could, as you've indicated, add it in with

[3:15:08] Trustee Luckham: the existing guidelines in that, which would obviously delay this process further. So trust

[3:15:14] Trustee Luckham: you, Bernardo. And then

[3:15:16] Voice 5: just to clarify what I have contemplated here along the lines of what

[3:15:21] Voice 5: Planner McArthur is talking about is that the LUB or the proposed amendments in bylaw 154

[3:15:28] Voice 5: for include a long list of guidelines as to how development

[3:15:37] Voice 5: applications for DP3 are to be dealt with.

[3:15:44] Voice 5: And I'm proposing that we add guidelines to that that address

[3:15:52] Voice 5: this whole additions issue.

[3:15:54] Voice 5: The content of that, you know, I'm not in a position to give a long shopping list of directions or suggestions to staff, but I think staff's heard what I'm talking about. I'm just trying desperately to make this a more streamlined process for the people who are going to be affected by it.

[3:16:14] Voice 11: Yeah.

[3:16:15] Voice 5: And I'm hoping that because the staff has the expertise, they'll review things that are already out there, they'll apply their expertise to these issues, and then they'll bring draft guidelines to us, and then we might be able to work with those to shape them into what we need. That's the idea.

[3:16:31] Voice 5: Right.

[3:16:35] Trustee Luckham: Okay. So, I respect that and appreciate the effort here. Did you have anything else to

[3:16:44] Trustee Luckham: add, Plummer-Karger? But we could, let me just ask this question, we could advance these bylaws now

[3:16:52] Trustee Luckham: and start this up as another amendment process to the OCP to add those guidelines,

[3:16:59] Trustee Luckham: lines, in my inclinations, rather than delaying this whole OCP-LUB process further. And that may

[3:17:07] Trustee Luckham: or may not constitute more new information with respect to public hearing, and I don't know about

[3:17:12] Trustee Luckham: that. But there's a motion on the screen. Did you have any additional suggestions? I'm kind of

[3:17:20] Trustee Luckham: thinking out loud, Leonard McCarger, and that's a bad thing to do.

[3:17:24] Planner McCargar: Well, I'm a bit unclear on

[3:17:27] Planner McCargar: exactly what's being asked and I am concerned that this is new information that I would be

[3:17:34] Planner McCargar: I'm being asked to go out and research and come back with new guidelines

[3:17:39] Planner McCargar: we would

[3:17:39] Voice 4: I'm

[3:17:41] Planner McCargar: unclear whether it's directly related to what we've heard at the public hearing

[3:17:46] Planner McCargar: yeah I'm feeling a little bit lost myself so I might just have to defer and and try to get

[3:17:54] Planner McCargar: our manager in in the meeting to to really understand and move forward with this okay

[3:18:02] Trustee Luckham: that's sufficient for me unless i see kate louise stanford has a question um and there is a move and

[3:18:11] Trustee Luckham: steve

[3:18:12] Trustee Stamford: bernardo can you give me an example of what you're thinking of because you're mentioning the

[3:18:15] Trustee Stamford: uh the additions but what like what kind of wording would you see helpful i mean i'm perfectly

[3:18:22] Trustee Stamford: willing to look at it i'm just trying to figure out how we could help people in that way what i'm

[3:18:28] Voice 5: looking at is limiting the range of questions that a qep would have to look at so that

[3:18:38] Voice 5: it's not just an open-ended thing that um is just left to the discretion of whichever planner

[3:18:48] Voice 5: happens to be there in, you know, next year, three years, 10, 15 years from now.

[3:18:54] Voice 5: And really, the starting point for this is, you know, you've heard my arguments about why I

[3:18:58] Voice 5: believe this is an unreasonable imposition. That's not going anywhere. But so what I'm trying to do

[3:19:05] Voice 5: is hoping that we can develop guidelines that will simply make the application process

[3:19:12] Voice 5: for applicants in that position seeking to make an addition to make that process easier for them

[3:19:17] Voice 5: And what I'm immediately contemplating is that the requirements that staff help us develop, the requirements for an addition that is approvable, if that's the right word.

[3:19:35] Voice 5: and then that way when that's documented that gives direction to applicants so they know what

[3:19:41] Voice 5: situations make sense and that they're likely to get or it makes sense it makes sense for them to

[3:19:47] Voice 5: apply for uh an addition application and uh it's just to make it simpler for them gives them

[3:19:54] Voice 5: direction but also the staff um and if we do it that way i'm anticipating it will reduce

[3:20:02] Voice 5: reduce some of the cost, some of the uncertainty and inconvenience in the time delay, because it's

[3:20:09] Voice 5: going to limit the universe of questions that the QEP will have to look into, or whether a QEP is

[3:20:14] Voice 5: even required. I'm speaking in terms of abstractions now, because I don't have tangible points to make

[3:20:21] Voice 5: out, because I never thought imposing the DP requirement was necessary in the first place. So

[3:20:26] Voice 5: i'm now struggling to think okay if trustee stanford and trustee luckham and the staff

[3:20:32] Voice 5: have all these ideas of things that they want to protect against well let's specify those things

[3:20:38] Voice 5: in the guidelines so that we have this limited you frankly a limited universe of inconvenience

[3:20:43] Voice 5: that's what i'm getting so

[3:20:45] Trustee Luckham: i'll come to you a second step trustee stanford i just want to ask

[3:20:48] Trustee Luckham: the obvious question in my mind at this instant is a development approval information bylaw

[3:20:54] Trustee Luckham: is the tool that we use across the Islands Trust to do, for the most part, exactly that. Is that

[3:21:01] Trustee Luckham: correct, Planner McCarter?

[3:21:03] Planner McCargar: That's correct. That was, as Trustee Bernardo started speaking more,

[3:21:08] Planner McCargar: that got me thinking as well that this is sounding more like the scope of information

[3:21:13] Planner McCargar: that we would require in a DAI bylaw.

[3:21:17] Trustee Luckham: Right.

[3:21:18] Trustee Luckham: So to me,

[3:21:22] Trustee Luckham: this motion actually needs to start

[3:21:26] Trustee Luckham: a development approval information bylaw process

[3:21:29] Trustee Luckham: that would happen outside of the OCP and the LUB at this time.

[3:21:35] Trustee Luckham: And when that was developed,

[3:21:38] Trustee Luckham: there may be a necessary amendment to the OCP,

[3:21:40] Trustee Luckham: but um to bring it into force but i think that that's all doable it's not the world isn't going

[3:21:47] Trustee Luckham: to change overnight but this is a really positive direction to go joe thank you trustee stanford

[3:21:53] Trustee Luckham: um

[3:21:57] Trustee Stamford: yeah i mean uh development information bylaws or information development bylaws it's

[3:22:03] Trustee Stamford: that's where we need to go anyway with everything um i think um just so my understanding process is

[3:22:12] Trustee Stamford: is when we have a QEP come in, they're the ones that are, they're like, okay, this is an area with

[3:22:21] Trustee Stamford: X designation, for sure. These are the things we're looking for. They're the ones that make

[3:22:28] Trustee Stamford: the determination. It's not planning staff going, well, I think you should look at the stream here

[3:22:34] Trustee Stamford: or the the plants over there we don't tell them but i think the information bylaw will make it

[3:22:44] Trustee Stamford: very clear for everybody uh what is required whenever anything like this comes through

[3:22:51] Trustee Stamford: so they're not scrambling all all the time and it it goes with all the scenarios

[3:22:57] Trustee Stamford: on Gambier and Keats.

[3:22:59] Trustee Stamford: I would love that.

[3:23:00] Trustee Stamford: It's on our project list.

[3:23:02] Trustee Luckham: Right.

[3:23:04] Trustee Luckham: So thanks for identifying it's on the project list.

[3:23:07] Trustee Luckham: So we need to advance it.

[3:23:08] Trustee Luckham: Joe?

[3:23:10] Voice 5: Yeah.

[3:23:12] Voice 5: I am reluctant to go that path

[3:23:18] Voice 5: because that means we end up past,

[3:23:22] Voice 5: you know, these bylaws may well be passed

[3:23:23] Voice 5: and then they're in place.

[3:23:25] Voice 5: And with our usual process

[3:23:28] Voice 5: and resource limitations,

[3:23:29] Voice 5: limitations. We have no idea when that direction or guidance is going to, you know, outside of the

[3:23:36] Voice 5: bylaw is going to be prepared or is able to be prepared. This project's taken seven years.

[3:23:44] Voice 5: We've got the Gambier work, OCP work that's got to get done. So I'm reluctant to go down that path

[3:23:51] Voice 5: because if these bylaws pass, I would like them to be the complete package. And we do have other

[3:23:57] Voice 5: guidelines worked into the uh in bylaw 154 that um established a framework for uh how applications

[3:24:08] Voice 5: would you build be dealt with in other contexts so i don't understand why we can't address some

[3:24:13] Voice 5: of that here uh uh in in terms of developing guidelines now to go into the um uh bylaw 154

[3:24:23] Voice 5: And to Plano-McCarter's point that, you know, she's wary about disrupting the results, you know, the whole process in the sense we have the public hearing and we ought not to acquire new information or change things if we want to pass these things as is.

[3:24:43] Voice 5: But if making them better requires us to go through the public hearing again, then I don't, I certainly wouldn't object to that.

[3:24:53] Voice 5: Anyhow, the motion's out there, and if somebody's willing to second it, I'd be happy to have

[3:25:01] Voice 5: further debate on it.

[3:25:02] Voice 5: Thank you.

[3:25:03] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:25:03] Trustee Luckham: So the motion that you proposed is on the screen.

[3:25:06] Trustee Luckham: Are you satisfied that you don't want to change that to a DEA, a Development Approval Information

[3:25:13] Trustee Luckham: By-law?

[3:25:14] Voice 5: I think that's, in all sincerity, I think it's wiser for us to just take care of it

[3:25:19] Voice 5: now.

[3:25:20] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:25:20] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Fair enough then. So is there a seconder for the motion? Seconded by Trustee Stamford.

[3:25:27] Trustee Luckham: Thank you. Marlis wants to speak. Oh, Marlis. Thank you. Over to you.

[3:25:35] Planner McCargar: Yeah. I just wanted to bring up quickly that once this project, the Keech Shoreline project

[3:25:40] Planner McCargar: wraps up, there would be the opportunity to take on another minor project in addition to

[3:25:46] Planner McCargar: the major project that's ongoing. So the LTCs are permitted one minor and one major.

[3:25:51] Planner McCargar: If there was concerns that there wouldn't be time or resources to do that, there would

[3:25:58] Planner McCargar: be another minor project that the LTC could decide to do.

[3:26:04] Trustee Luckham: Right.

[3:26:05] Trustee Luckham: So, and you're clearly calling this a minor project, whether it's guidelines or a DAI.

[3:26:14] Trustee Luckham: Would that be correct?

[3:26:15] Planner McCargar: A DAI would be a minor project, yes.

[3:26:18] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:26:18] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:26:20] Planner McCargar: So, okay.

[3:26:23] Trustee Luckham: I, you know, yeah. So I'm prepared to consider, right, that if developer draft

[3:26:40] Trustee Luckham: guidelines in this motion could be applicable to a DAI, I would be very supportive, fully

[3:26:53] Trustee Luckham: supportive of it i think we owe it to everybody after seven years to get this ocp and lub through

[3:27:01] Trustee Luckham: and in it's up to the local trust committee to decide the its priorities and if you want

[3:27:07] Trustee Luckham: these guidelines or dai as a priority and either and either of them could happen but i don't want

[3:27:15] Trustee Luckham: to fetter the discretion of the LTC to go in one direction or the other. But in the intervening,

[3:27:26] Trustee Luckham: if we adopt these and advance them accordingly and wrap it up, then we can start with a good,

[3:27:32] Trustee Luckham: clean slate with a development permit area that's clear and develop the guidelines

[3:27:39] Trustee Luckham: subsequently and advance them in a timely fashion. And the public wouldn't need to be aware of that.

[3:27:45] Trustee Luckham: So if you're planning on doing a 540-square-foot addition, hang on to your horses for a bit until we get the DIA stuff done.

[3:27:53] Trustee Luckham: We've already demonstrated that we can advance stuff if we really want to.

[3:27:57] Trustee Luckham: So I'm going to want to call the vote on this, and I guess I'll just raise my hand.

[3:28:01] Voice 4: Well, in

[3:28:01] Trustee Luckham: point

[3:28:02] Voice 5: of order, the motion's on the floor.

[3:28:06] Voice 5: There hasn't been discussion, and Trustee Stanford has her hand up.

[3:28:09] Trustee Luckham: Yeah, thanks, Joe.

[3:28:10] Trustee Luckham: and I'm fully aware of the process

[3:28:14] Trustee Luckham: and I'm going to go to Kate Louise Stanford

[3:28:16] Trustee Luckham: because her hand is up.

[3:28:18] Voice 4: Thank you.

[3:28:22] Trustee Stamford: I'm more than willing to commit

[3:28:24] Trustee Stamford: to the minor project

[3:28:26] Trustee Stamford: being development information bylaws.

[3:28:28] Trustee Stamford: I think it's really important

[3:28:30] Trustee Stamford: and I've been wanting to get to them for ages.

[3:28:35] Trustee Stamford: This could advance further

[3:28:37] Trustee Stamford: further um all sorts of um clarity issues within the local trust area even though this is specific

[3:28:48] Trustee Stamford: um we could build on this and and i'd be more than happy to work with that um i'm not sure

[3:28:55] Trustee Stamford: what the impacts are yet which i'd like to know more of but um um i i think this is a good

[3:29:02] Trustee Stamford: direction i i do really hear some of the difficulty and confusion and frustration about these these

[3:29:10] Trustee Stamford: specific areas and the impacts um and the unknowns that people feel they have when when building in

[3:29:17] Trustee Stamford: these sensitive areas so if that helps any um i would love to see this move forward um as a minor

[3:29:25] Trustee Stamford: your project but respecting i i also don't want to see this uh whole effort over seven years

[3:29:34] Trustee Stamford: um um be shot down for for something um that we could move forward on so okay

[3:29:45] Trustee Luckham: okay so uh it's i

[3:29:50] Trustee Luckham: think it's time to vote if anybody has anything further to say i will vote in favor of this but

[3:29:57] Trustee Luckham: but I want to advance the bylaws as they are today.

[3:30:00] Trustee Luckham: So I'm going to call for the vote. All those in favor? So that carries unanimously. And so now for the business to us, if I'm not mistaken, is clear. It's the recommendations 1, 2, 4, and we can vote according to our conscience. Do I have somebody that would like to make a motion?

[3:30:28] Trustee Stamford: I'll do it if Trustee Bernardo doesn't want to. So that's the recommendations on page 144?

[3:30:38] Trustee Stamford: 44?

[3:30:39] Trustee Luckham: Correct, yes.

[3:30:41] Trustee Luckham: Do we have them put up on the screen, please? That's a good idea.

[3:30:50] Trustee Luckham: I've got them here, so I'll start them. Yeah, you can start them, but let's get them up on the screen

[3:30:54] Trustee Luckham: for the public. Okay, I'll wait. Oh, yeah.

[3:31:01] Voice 3: Marlis, are you putting them up?

[3:31:05] Planner McCargar: Yeah, I can do that. Just give me a minute here.

[3:31:39] Trustee Luckham: Go. Okay. Kate Louise Stanford, over to you.

[3:31:46] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambler and Local Trust Committee bylaw number

[3:31:49] Trustee Stamford: Number 153, cited as Keats Island Official Community Plan 2002, Amendment Number 1, 2021, be read a third time.

[3:31:58] Trustee Luckham: Do I have a seconder?

[3:32:02] Trustee Luckham: So I will second the motion.

[3:32:04] Trustee Luckham: Have it on the table.

[3:32:06] Trustee Luckham: Any discussion?

[3:32:09] Trustee Luckham: Joe Bernardo.

[3:32:11] Voice 5: For the record, I just wish to register my objection to this bylaw for the reasons I've given before.

[3:32:19] Voice 5: Thank you.

[3:32:20] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[3:32:23] Trustee Luckham: Anything further?

[3:32:24] Trustee Luckham: further then I'm going to call the vote all those in favor please raise your hand so please lower

[3:32:32] Trustee Luckham: your hands please those opposed please raise your hand so one opposed that motion carries

[3:32:41] Trustee Luckham: so I have a second recommendation I

[3:32:45] Trustee Stamford: move that the Gambier and local trust committee proposed

[3:32:48] Trustee Stamford: bylaw number 153 site is Keats Island official Community Plan 2002 amendment number one 2021

[3:32:54] Trustee Stamford: 21 be forwarded to the minister of municipal affairs for approval uh

[3:33:00] Trustee Luckham: seconder i'm going to

[3:33:04] Trustee Luckham: second what is a process uh motion so that's seconded any discussion joe

[3:33:12] Voice 5: uh for the record

[3:33:15] Voice 5: uh i would wish to register my uh opposition to the to um to this bylaw or to this motion thank

[3:33:23] Voice 5: so

[3:33:24] Trustee Luckham: i'll take it that you want your uh vote recorded yes

[3:33:28] Voice 5: please yeah

[3:33:29] Trustee Luckham: so we'll can we'll do

[3:33:30] Trustee Luckham: that in the previous um motion as well if that's all right and lisa you'll take note of that

[3:33:37] Trustee Luckham: so all those in favor of the second motion on the table uh please lower your hands those opposed

[3:33:45] Trustee Luckham: and one opposed thank you joe so we have a third recommendation i

[3:33:52] Trustee Stamford: move that the gambler

[3:33:53] Trustee Stamford: on local trust committee bylaw number 154 size keats island land use bylaw 2002 amendment number

[3:33:58] Trustee Stamford: 1 2021 be read a third time uh

[3:34:02] Trustee Luckham: do i have a seconder and so i'll second the motion and

[3:34:08] Trustee Luckham: there's any discussion for

[3:34:12] Voice 5: the record i would like to have my opposition to the motion registered

[3:34:15] Voice 5: thank

[3:34:16] Trustee Luckham: you and so i'll call the vote all those in favor please lower your hand any opposed

[3:34:26] Trustee Luckham: thank you joe we'll record that opposition and a final motion i

[3:34:34] Trustee Stamford: move that the gambier island

[3:34:35] Trustee Stamford: local trust committee proposed bylaw number 153 cited keats island official community plan 2002

[3:34:40] Trustee Stamford: amendment number 1 2021 and proposed bylaw number 154 cited keats island land use bylaw

[3:34:47] Trustee Stamford: 2002 amendment number 1 2021 be forwarded to the secretary of the islands trust for executive

[3:34:55] Trustee Luckham: So moved to have a seconder. I'll second the motion. Any discussion?

[3:35:03] Voice 5: I ask that my opposition to the motion be registered. Thank you.

[3:35:07] Voice 5: Thank

[3:35:07] Trustee Luckham: you. We'll be recorded. And so all those in favor, lower your hands.

[3:35:18] Trustee Luckham: And I've got something.

[3:35:20] Trustee Luckham: Should we finish the voting first?

[3:35:22] Trustee Luckham: Isn't that it?

[3:35:24] Voice 5: No. I just have to vote against it.

[3:35:27] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:35:27] Trustee Luckham: Okay, so those opposed, one opposed, so that does carry.

[3:35:33] Trustee Luckham: And do you have a final remark there on the business here today?

[3:35:40] Trustee Stamford: I'd just like to say how difficult that was.

[3:35:43] Trustee Stamford: I do not vote against the island representative for this project lightly.

[3:35:54] Trustee Stamford: I fully recognize the concerns that he has.

[3:35:57] Trustee Stamford: um the reason i voted for this is there are a number of other aspects of this pilot that are

[3:36:06] Trustee Stamford: really important that should move through in order to provide better protection for

[3:36:13] Trustee Stamford: keats island in the foreshore i also want to recognize the huge amount of work and effort

[3:36:20] Trustee Stamford: that trustee bernardo has done to move this into a place that can be more conducive for his

[3:36:28] Trustee Stamford: community and i hope to be able to keep working to make this better um on keats island and from

[3:36:38] Voice 5: my part i'd like to thank trustee stanford for her kind remarks yeah

[3:36:43] Trustee Luckham: very good um thank you

[3:36:46] Trustee Luckham: without belaboring it too much indeed the bylaw is better for the debate that we've had

[3:36:52] Trustee Luckham: and it's never over because there's always room for amendments in the future as the trustees at

[3:36:59] Trustee Luckham: the time feels necessary and quite honestly i'm looking forward to this conversation about

[3:37:05] Trustee Luckham: guidelines or a development approval information bylaw that will make it better and hopefully

[3:37:13] Trustee Luckham: address the issues that we've been unable to resolve at this time so joe one final remark and

[3:37:20] Trustee Luckham: we'll move on i

[3:37:21] Voice 5: have a question actually for um planet mccarver uh if uh marlos you could spell

[3:37:28] Voice 5: out what the next steps of the process are i appreciate this material is going to be going

[3:37:32] Voice 5: now to the executive committee but if you're able to give me some rough um outline of the steps and

[3:37:38] Voice 5: the timing of it so

[3:37:43] Planner McCargar: the next step would be to direct staff to move forward with creating a

[3:37:49] Planner McCargar: project charter for the next minor project that the ltc wants to undertake and then i'm sorry

[3:37:56] Voice 5: i

[3:37:57] Voice 5: mean what the next steps are with respect to these bylaws and the the sequence of events and my

[3:38:02] Voice 5: understanding is eventually they'll end up in front of the minister's staff or something like

[3:38:06] Voice 5: that

[3:38:06] Planner McCargar: yeah that's correct so the next steps would be that the ocp bylaw number 153 is going to be

[3:38:13] Planner McCargar: forwarded to uh well they get forwarded to both get forwarded to executive council

[3:38:18] Planner McCargar: executive committee and then they will the OCP will be forwarded to the

[3:38:22] Planner McCargar: minister and then those will come back and be put in front of the LTC for final

[3:38:29] Planner McCargar: adoption thank you and the timeline varies the bylaw can be with the

[3:38:37] Planner McCargar: minister from three to six months so it could be six months before these bylaws

[3:38:43] Planner McCargar: are back in front of the LTC for final adoption right

[3:38:47] Voice 5: thank you for that

[3:38:48] Voice 5: clarification very helpful and

[3:38:50] Trustee Luckham: i presume that the bylaws coming before the executive committee

[3:38:53] Trustee Luckham: would be there not at our pre-council meeting because we don't do business typically then but

[3:38:58] Trustee Luckham: we'll be at our next regular business meeting yeah yeah which would be in must be one before

[3:39:05] Trustee Luckham: christmas but otherwise it might be january i think the night yeah anyway okay that concludes

[3:39:12] Trustee Luckham: That concludes that. Thank you. And we have listened and we've taken all of what we heard very seriously. And I hope that that's understood. We're going to move to correspondence. It appears we haven't received any recently. So I'm going to skip over that. No new business. This brings us to staff reports. And the first item here of significance. And Jason Yeomans, thank you for joining us. 12.1 Phase 4 Community Engagement Options for the Policy Statement.

[3:39:43] Trustee Luckham: uh psap you call that um so uh uh jason planter uh jason yeomans over to you policy analyst i

[3:39:54] Trustee Luckham: think phrases thank

[3:39:56] Voice 13: you chair luckham and apologies because i think this is going to

[3:39:59] Voice 13: be about the fourth time that you'll have heard this uh spiel from me by now

[3:40:02] Trustee Luckham: but it's new for the

[3:40:03] Trustee Luckham: others so please okay

[3:40:05] Voice 13: uh hello gambier island trustees uh coming to you today as an emissary

[3:40:12] Voice 13: on behalf of Trust Area Services

[3:40:13] Voice 13: concerning the Islands Trust Policy Statement Amendment Project.

[3:40:17] Voice 13: The current project charter for this project

[3:40:20] Voice 13: envisions a modest amount of on-island engagement

[3:40:24] Voice 13: related to the document.

[3:40:26] Voice 13: And the purpose of this engagement

[3:40:28] Voice 13: is primarily to help inform local trust committee responses

[3:40:31] Voice 13: when you receive the draft policy statement

[3:40:33] Voice 13: as a referral from Trust Council in the months ahead,

[3:40:37] Voice 13: if and when they eventually give the document

[3:40:40] Voice 13: their approval in principle. So essentially the question that is being asked of you today is what

[3:40:45] Voice 13: sort of information do you feel that you are going to need to inform your local trust committee's

[3:40:50] Voice 13: referral response when you get this document? Page two of the report that we've included

[3:40:55] Voice 13: lays out the types of on-isle engagement that might be possible within the project budget that

[3:41:00] Voice 13: is currently proposed, although that is in flux as well as we go through the business case process

[3:41:06] Voice 13: assess at Trust Council. I will just note that regardless of which local engagement option you

[3:41:11] Voice 13: choose, your constituents will still be able to share their opinions on the policy statement

[3:41:16] Voice 13: directly with Trust Council in the form of an online survey. So really, what we're essentially

[3:41:22] Voice 13: asking you is, is it important for you that Trust Area Services staff make an appearance on your

[3:41:28] Voice 13: island to talk directly to your constituents and gather information directly from them?

[3:41:32] Voice 13: or is it sufficient that as some other local trust committees have chosen perhaps we just

[3:41:37] Voice 13: tune into one of your local trust committees to share information there and you can gather

[3:41:42] Voice 13: feedback in an open house online open house type of format anyhow that that is the spiel there are

[3:41:48] Voice 13: several options laid out in the table perhaps there are options that we haven't considered

[3:41:52] Voice 13: that you think might be conducive to gathering your constituents views I will turn the conversation

[3:41:58] Voice 13: back over to you well back over to the chair who can do as he pleases well

[3:42:03] Trustee Luckham: i'm going to ask the

[3:42:05] Trustee Luckham: trustees what they would like to do um certainly um in a couple of the communities i'm involved in

[3:42:11] Trustee Luckham: we have opted for doing a including it in an existing meeting town hall work workshop type

[3:42:19] Trustee Luckham: session i guess with staff okay louise stamford um

[3:42:27] Trustee Stamford: i'll just speak to how we did it last time

[3:42:30] Trustee Stamford: um last term we did a an open house in um north vancouver um it was fairly well attended probably

[3:42:42] Trustee Stamford: 25 30 people um it did only hit those people that live in that area though so there wasn't

[3:42:51] Trustee Stamford: really an opportunity to connect with full-time islanders um or people that weren't from the

[3:42:59] Trustee Stamford: North Van area. So for that reason, I'm open to an online workshop that's specific, or online within

[3:43:14] Trustee Stamford: a meeting. But as you can see, we don't usually get a lot of people at our meetings, they are in

[3:43:20] Trustee Stamford: the during the day, and an evening opportunity online might be attended to have more attendance.

[3:43:27] Trustee Stamford: And it's, again, we always seem to be challenged by geography here.

[3:43:34] Trustee Stamford: And, you know, we're trying to accommodate several islands to access the information.

[3:43:40] Trustee Stamford: The awareness level right now, at least on Gambier, is not very high.

[3:43:46] Trustee Stamford: I'm not sure if it ever would be really high.

[3:43:48] Trustee Stamford: they're more concerned about direct impact to the island itself and and more day-to-day issues

[3:43:58] Trustee Stamford: than where the policy statement's going but that's just my perspective.

[3:44:08] Voice 5: Joe Bonara? Yeah my concern

[3:44:11] Voice 5: here in a sense is highly influenced by my experience with the business we just conducted

[3:44:22] Voice 5: which is, in fact, dealing with those bylaws is, in fact, why I ran for this office.

[3:44:27] Voice 5: And as I mentioned before, one of the contributing factors that has made this project so difficult was the communication aspect of it at the outset.

[3:44:43] Voice 5: We have a process at the bylaw level that just isn't, you know, it's a lawful process, but it's not particularly satisfactory to a lot of people in the community.

[3:44:54] Voice 5: And it comes down to people being asked to attend information meetings, not to deal with or to express views or hear information about some pretty complex issues before they're actually properly informed or sensitized to it.

[3:45:15] Voice 5: And I think Trustee Stamford will agree that there's a lot of, you know, separate from legitimate objections and complaints.

[3:45:23] Voice 5: There's a lot of misapprehensions, misconceptions that emerge when people have only kind of superficial exposure to a complicated topic and are presented with materials that, you know, may be familiar to us,

[3:45:39] Voice 5: but are very difficult for the average person to sort of get a grasp on their significance

[3:45:45] Voice 5: when they just land on them by way of some email or something like that.

[3:45:48] Voice 5: So I, first of all, agree that having an online town hall is probably better

[3:45:58] Voice 5: after business hours to maximize attendance.

[3:46:01] Voice 5: But well before that, I would really hope that we would be able to engage

[3:46:09] Voice 5: in some kind of more direct outreach to our constituents,

[3:46:12] Voice 5: if we have their email addresses or whatever,

[3:46:16] Voice 5: or even if we make use of the addresses

[3:46:18] Voice 5: that they have for the tax documents

[3:46:22] Voice 5: to send them really good information

[3:46:27] Voice 5: that explains not just in broad terms

[3:46:33] Voice 5: what the trust policy statement intends to do,

[3:46:36] Voice 5: but our interpretation of how that will shake out

[3:46:39] Voice 5: in practice because people will react to this not at some conceptual level but how does this affect

[3:46:47] Voice 5: me that's what they're going to be concerned about and imaginations run wild and so I think

[3:46:56] Voice 5: part of this is communicating not to manage expectations but just to ground them in reality

[3:47:02] Voice 5: and so I would really be concerned that we engage in a really good outreach where we are actually

[3:47:08] Voice 5: presenting people with good concrete practical information so that when they go to the trust

[3:47:13] Voice 5: policy statement um they they're they're oriented the right way to sort of how to think about it

[3:47:19] Voice 5: they don't have to agree with it but at least they won't have misunderstandings or misconceptions

[3:47:22] Voice 5: about what we're trying to do here and i think um given some of the areas that we're addressing

[3:47:30] Voice 5: um uh and uh to be direct about it uh the intense and in my view proper focus on

[3:47:37] Voice 5: on advancing reconciliation that needs to be communicated in a very clear and sophisticated

[3:47:45] Voice 5: but plain language way to the community so that you know let's be honest people are easily

[3:47:52] Voice 5: threatened when they see things that look like big change and so it needs to be explained to them

[3:47:58] Voice 5: exactly what this might mean in practical terms so i've gone on and linked about that because i'm

[3:48:04] Voice 5: actually pretty anxious you know because of past experience here that this um the trust policy

[3:48:09] Voice 5: statement if and when we actually settle on a draft um is received with the right spirit thank

[3:48:16] Voice 5: you any

[3:48:19] Trustee Luckham: remarks uh jason there yeah i

[3:48:22] Voice 13: just i just want to um plant one little seed uh in relation

[3:48:26] Voice 13: to one of trustee bernardo's comments there which is potentially the desire to communicate directly

[3:48:32] Voice 13: directly to your constituents in the form of a physical mail-out potentially. And the reason I

[3:48:39] Voice 13: want to just speak briefly about that is you're going to want to tune in. If you think that's

[3:48:44] Voice 13: an important method of communication, then you're going to want to tune in carefully

[3:48:48] Voice 13: to the business case discussion at Trust Council in December, particularly because

[3:48:55] Voice 13: there is currently a disjuncture between the budget that EC is potentially landing on and

[3:49:00] Voice 13: and the original budget that was proposed, particularly around how much we want to spend

[3:49:06] Voice 13: on communications. And so a mail out to all constituents in the Islands Trust area,

[3:49:11] Voice 13: to the best of my knowledge, costs somewhere between $8,000 and $10,000. And so, you know,

[3:49:16] Voice 13: that is a real tangible cost that if you believe that's an important method of communication for

[3:49:22] Voice 13: us to reach out to your constituents, then we're going to want to see that budgeted for. So I just

[3:49:28] Voice 13: just want to sort of plant that right now and the earlier part of your comment trustee bernardo was

[3:49:33] Voice 13: related to a an online town hall um to speak directly with and gather information from your

[3:49:40] Voice 13: constituents and that's certainly one of the options that's available here in the table but

[3:49:43] Voice 13: yes i just wanted to touch on that that mail out option as as having a cost that you are all going

[3:49:50] Voice 13: going to have to sort of uh parse a little bit uh at your december meeting if

[3:49:57] Voice 5: i can respond um

[3:49:58] Voice 5: because i actually have some relevant information by virtue of my role as chair of the financial

[3:50:04] Voice 5: planning committee uh jason when that topic has come up about the mail out my recollection most

[3:50:09] Voice 5: recently the discussion about the business case it was more of a preoccupation about

[3:50:13] Voice 5: the usual more general communications of what the trust does within the within the tax you know

[3:50:21] Voice 5: with a mail-out that's included with the tax documentation.

[3:50:28] Voice 5: And there's a preoccupation with some other issues like that,

[3:50:31] Voice 5: but I'm not quite sure we actually delved that deeply

[3:50:34] Voice 5: into making use of that as a methodology

[3:50:36] Voice 5: to communicate the trust policy statement.

[3:50:39] Voice 5: And it would be helpful

[3:50:43] Voice 5: when that budget aspect comes up at trust council.

[3:50:50] Voice 5: You know, it's not impossible to add that to the agenda, you know, to talk about adding, you know, that's an idea about how to communicate this stuff. So, you know, and, you know, $8,000 to $10,000 is peanuts relative to the importance of the trust policy statement.

[3:51:09] Voice 5: okay

[3:51:13] Trustee Luckham: thank you joe yeah um just wanted to be clear and i'm not 100 sure um what we're talking about

[3:51:21] Trustee Luckham: here is is a desire for the gambier keats community to receive those mail outs other

[3:51:29] Trustee Luckham: ltcs have not made that desire so clearly it wouldn't be eight to ten thousand dollars it

[3:51:34] Trustee Luckham: would be a thousand or two thousand dollars based upon the population and do you have an idea of

[3:51:41] Trustee Luckham: and one is that correct is that the assumption you would be working on and do you have an

[3:51:45] Trustee Luckham: idea of what uh per trustee or per ltc area cost associated with that request might be because i

[3:51:54] Trustee Luckham: don't know that you're necessarily going to get a broad support from other ltcs or not even though

[3:52:03] Trustee Luckham: So it might be peanuts. It might be more significant dollars.

[3:52:08] Voice 13: Sure. I don't know the LTA by LTA cost of a mail out.

[3:52:14] Voice 13: But what I heard from Trustee Bernardo there was sort of a desire for that general, broad educational opportunity related to the policy statement.

[3:52:24] Voice 13: And that's probably something that would be to the benefit of all of your constituents throughout the trust area and not just within Gambier and Keats.

[3:52:34] Voice 13: But if, I mean, there is no particular reason that we can't do it in that way, you know, if different local trust committees want to select the ability to have that.

[3:52:44] Voice 13: But my personal professional opinion is if we're sending out general educational info to one local trust area, it would probably be beneficial to send it out throughout.

[3:52:55] Trustee Luckham: Okay.

[3:52:56] Trustee Luckham: So obviously, you're going through all the LTCs.

[3:52:59] Trustee Luckham: You'll have a better idea when we get closer to the March budget finalization as to whether or not that's what's necessary or not.

[3:53:08] Voice 4: What

[3:53:08] Trustee Luckham: do you need from this LTC today?

[3:53:10] Trustee Luckham: What

[3:53:11] Voice 13: I'm looking for from this LTC is a resolution as to selecting one of the engagement options or more of the engagement options laid out in Table 2, or indeed, if what you need is not reflected in that table, then a resolution requesting whatever methodology of local engagement you're looking for.

[3:53:33] Trustee Luckham: Right. So, Kate, do you have anything to add? Does one of you want to make a motion?

[3:53:42] Trustee Stamford: Did Joe put his hand up there? I just missed it. No?

[3:53:46] Trustee Luckham: I didn't see his hand go up.

[3:53:50] Trustee Stamford: I'm so bad at this.

[3:53:53] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[3:53:54] Trustee Stamford: Okay.

[3:53:57] Trustee Stamford: I'll move that the Gamber Island Local Trust Committee

[3:54:03] Trustee Stamford: select engagement option three,

[3:54:14] Trustee Stamford: specifically an online town hall opportunity

[3:54:18] Trustee Stamford: opportunity separate from the local trust committee and consideration of a mail-out

[3:54:30] Trustee Stamford: communication prior to the meeting as our option for community engagement about the new draft

[3:54:38] Trustee Stamford: islands trust policy statement so

[3:54:44] Trustee Luckham: let's give lisa a moment to up on the screen can i

[3:54:49] Voice 13: just note that

[3:54:50] Voice 13: but what Trustee Stanford described there

[3:54:54] Voice 13: sounded more to me like option five than option three.

[3:54:56] Trustee Stamford: Oh, okay.

[3:54:57] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I was trying to read through them all.

[3:55:00] Trustee Stamford: So let's say option five.

[3:55:02] Trustee Stamford: Sounds good.

[3:55:06] Trustee Stamford: Yes, option five, now that I saw it again.

[3:55:10] Voice 3: I will pop that up on the screen in one second.

[3:55:14] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[3:55:16] Voice 3: I just have to fix something.

[3:55:18] Trustee Stamford: Something's burning.

[3:55:19] Voice 9: Oh, no.

[3:55:22] Voice 9: Hopefully not dinner.

[3:55:24] Voice 9: It's dinner.

[3:55:25] Voice 4: Oh, dear.

[3:55:29] okay

[3:55:55] Trustee Luckham: well that's cool um trustee stanford i've never seen that in real life where somebody beams

[3:56:00] Trustee Luckham: up to their starship out of their space they're in and then beams back down again because that's

[3:56:05] Trustee Luckham: exactly what it looked like uh that's how we cook around

[3:56:09] Trustee Luckham: here so we have a motion right we seconded

[3:56:18] Trustee Luckham: it we're waiting for it to come up on the screen okay there it is is that what you intended

[3:56:27] Trustee Luckham: intended. A wee bit bigger, Lisa, would be great. Yeah.

[3:56:38] Trustee Luckham: All right. Trustee Bernard, do you second

[3:56:40] Trustee Luckham: that? Yes, seconded. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Raise

[3:56:51] Trustee Luckham: your hands physically or electronically. So that carries unanimously. Brilliant. Do you need

[3:56:58] Trustee Luckham: anything more from us, Jason?

[3:56:59] Voice 13: I do not, sir. Thank you for your time today.

[3:57:02] Trustee Luckham: Well, thank you for

[3:57:02] Trustee Luckham: joining us we appreciate that a lot all right

[3:57:05] Voice 13: see you all uh in december you

[3:57:08] Trustee Luckham: will let us continue on

[3:57:11] Trustee Luckham: uh what we have at 20 12.2 on page 170 is the annual meeting schedule for decision um staff

[3:57:22] Trustee Luckham: will put that together based upon a lot of elements does any anybody on staff want to

[3:57:28] Trustee Luckham: to speak to this or do you just want to call them read the motion and we'll vote on it

[3:57:40] Voice 3: sure

[3:57:41] Voice 3: if i may um yep

[3:57:43] Voice 9: if

[3:57:44] Voice 3: there are any um date proposed date complications i'm able to

[3:57:50] Voice 3: check alternatives um based on the uh trust council committee meeting schedule

[3:57:59] Voice 3: schedule for the subcommittees. Otherwise, if there are any that you'd like to identify as

[3:58:06] Voice 3: being electronic or in-person, now is also a good time to do that if you know that at this time.

[3:58:14] Voice 9: Okay.

[3:58:14] Trustee Stamford: Justice? So I'll start. We usually like to try and have

[3:58:22] Trustee Stamford: an in-person on Keats and an in-person on Gambier. I'm happy to do either June or September,

[3:58:34] Trustee Stamford: but it does depend on where we're at on the OCP. So do you have any preference, Joe?

[3:58:45] Voice 5: I'd like to see those dates up on the screen. I don't have the materials easily available to me

[3:58:49] Voice 5: leader.

[3:58:51] Voice 3: I'll put those up for you momentarily. And Trustee Stamford, we have looked, we do have

[3:58:58] Voice 3: inquiries into both a Gambier and a Keats venue for June or September, one in June, one in September,

[3:59:07] Voice 3: we're just seeing what's available. And we don't have that information back quite yet. And I'll

[3:59:13] Voice 3: get those dates for you now.

[3:59:14] Trustee Stamford: So maybe if we could just leave those open as in person, but I think

[3:59:19] Trustee Stamford: Keats is more challenging to get meeting space so if they go first then we can

[3:59:28] Trustee Stamford: work around that for Gambier.

[3:59:32] Voice 5: Certainly I got a lot of feedback actually blow

[3:59:35] Voice 5: back from residents who are frustrated when we scheduled our public hearing at

[3:59:41] Voice 5: the timing and you know the date time there's a lot of people who would like

[3:59:48] Voice 5: to have i think it's scheduled either probably in august now or deeper into july when uh people

[4:00:00] Voice 5: have more flexibility in terms of in-person meetings and uh yeah i think uh managing those

[4:00:11] Voice 5: expectations is going to be an issue on keys so could we

[4:00:15] Trustee Stamford: do you want to try going into july

[4:00:19] Trustee Stamford: rather than june 24th move into july yeah

[4:00:23] Voice 5: i think uh sometime in july might be better

[4:00:26] Voice 5: um and um but

[4:00:32] Trustee Stamford: it does make it challenging for that um venue that's the problem that we keep

[4:00:37] Trustee Stamford: coming up against with keats camp

[4:00:40] Planner McCargar: something

[4:00:41] Trustee Luckham: to offer yeah

[4:00:44] Planner McCargar: i'll just mention that we did hear

[4:00:45] Planner McCargar: back from keats camp um they are available for september 2nd meeting but not for the june 24th

[4:00:52] Planner McCargar: meeting and i think any times in july and august are challenging for keats camp if you know

[4:00:58] Planner McCargar: know of other venues that we could look at that would be helpful but as of now september 2nd is

[4:01:03] Planner McCargar: available if you think that's a good time to meet on keats island yeah

[4:01:11] Voice 5: i think um if it's on offer

[4:01:14] Voice 5: let me just check something here in terms of dates um um that's a tuesday and uh that's all

[4:01:34] Voice 5: is that the labor day weekend

[4:01:37] Trustee Stamford: september 2nd is coming up there yeah so

[4:01:43] Voice 5: the following weekend

[4:01:44] Voice 5: would be the Labor Day weekend. Is that right?

[4:01:47] Trustee Stamford: I think it's that weekend.

[4:01:55] Trustee Luckham: September 2025. I don't

[4:02:01] Trustee Luckham: even have that on my count. It's

[4:02:04] Trustee Stamford: usually the first Monday of the month would be Labor Day

[4:02:09] Trustee Stamford: and that would be

[4:02:10] Trustee Stamford: September 1st.

[4:02:10] Planner McCargar: Yeah through the chair it's September 1st is the holiday.

[4:02:19] Voice 5: So that

[4:02:19] Voice 5: it is the day immediately um well i guess that's dead labor day that or no september 1st is labor

[4:02:29] Voice 5: day so it's the day after labor day yeah

[4:02:31] Voice 5: um well the difficulty with that is uh i i i'm not sure

[4:02:40] Voice 5: we're going to get very much attendance at all i mean people will have you know scarpered off

[4:02:46] Voice 5: after the weekend and um no i i

[4:02:52] Voice 5: think in terms of maximizing attendance uh i'm sorry to be

[4:02:57] Voice 5: dithering like this but it's um we can't do july or august uh i i'm sorry about this but i i'm

[4:03:07] Voice 5: starting to question the value actually of the in-person meeting versus scheduling something

[4:03:11] Voice 5: that is like like in person on keats versus in person in a place like north vancouver west

[4:03:17] Voice 5: west vancouver in the evening that allows maximum attendance so that's what i'm struggling with

[4:03:24] Voice 5: right now and trustee stanford has way more experience with these things than i do so

[4:03:29] Voice 5: maybe she could weigh in with some suggestions here because i'm being indecisive because i'm

[4:03:34] Voice 5: not quite sure how to proceed here well

[4:03:37] Trustee Stamford: well i mean historically we have had good turnouts

[4:03:40] Trustee Stamford: on keats if we can get the the camp venue um just like with every scenario it's the usual

[4:03:49] Trustee Stamford: suspects kind of thing whoever's retired and living in the summers on keats that's who you're

[4:03:55] Trustee Stamford: going to get uh you will get a different audience in in north vancouver and it's been great i mean

[4:04:03] Trustee Stamford: you we've got about 50 people you know in it but it's a specific keats topic and you will get a

[4:04:10] Trustee Stamford: great turnout uh in north van um in an evening event for

[4:04:16] Voice 5: keats well i'm anticipating and hoping

[4:04:20] Voice 5: that we are not going to have a key specific topic yeah

[4:04:23] Voice 5: that's kind of done really um so that

[4:04:28] Trustee Stamford: that's kind of the mix that you're looking at uh it is a different scenario um i'm wondering how

[4:04:35] Trustee Stamford: this all plays against uh the gambier ocp process um so yeah that's about as much advice i can

[4:04:46] Trustee Stamford: suggest in turn there's no straightforward for keats i don't think well

[4:04:51] Voice 5: you know the the thing

[4:04:53] Voice 5: is that the reason people were vocal about the timing and location of the meeting is uh that

[4:05:01] Voice 5: that was about the public hearing which they were people people attended were seized by the

[4:05:06] Voice 5: the importance of the thing um if the agenda on september 2nd it's a housekeeping agenda basically

[4:05:15] Voice 5: and doesn't hasn't got anything too provocative i don't think anybody's going to care

[4:05:21] Voice 5: if they can make so i would prefer then to snag the september 2nd one for the live in person

[4:05:28] Voice 5: in keats meeting and as to use trustee stanford's uh phrase the usual suspects will show up and

[4:05:38] Voice 5: that will be a tidy and convenient meeting problem so let's do it that way and

[4:05:45] Trustee Stamford: we can always adjust

[4:05:47] Trustee Stamford: and maybe something will come up in which case it's braithwaite overnight or you know at night

[4:05:54] Trustee Stamford: But it's, yeah, that tends to be how it goes.

[4:05:59] Voice 5: Do you have any thoughts about when you would want to have the Gambier meeting?

[4:06:04] Trustee Stamford: I'm really wanting to see where the OCP is, and we are a bit more flexible in that we've got the venue.

[4:06:16] Trustee Stamford: March or June.

[4:06:20] Voice 5: All right.

[4:06:21] Trustee Stamford: Could work.

[4:06:25] Voice 5: Are you anticipating that the meeting, the LTC meeting will be merged into a community

[4:06:31] Voice 5: information session with respect to the LTC?

[4:06:35] Voice 5: I'm

[4:06:35] Trustee Stamford: not sure what to expect these days.

[4:06:38] Trustee Stamford: So yeah, I mean, I want to be able to make sure the option, but Marlis, do

[4:06:43] Trustee Stamford: you have an

[4:06:43] Trustee Stamford: idea?

[4:06:45] Planner McCargar: I don't have an idea about that.

[4:06:47] Planner McCargar: Sorry, I'm not sure.

[4:06:49] Planner McCargar: I just wanted some clarity because I'm feeling a bit confused on which meeting.

[4:06:55] Planner McCargar: so will there be a March meeting in North Vancouver at John Braithwaite? We just need to

[4:06:59] Planner McCargar: know some of these venues are very hard to book, so any short notice, we probably wouldn't be able

[4:07:06] Planner McCargar: to get it. So if you think typically we've done one meeting in North Vancouver, one meeting on

[4:07:11] Planner McCargar: Keats, and one meeting on Gambier, I think we're legislatively required to have two in-person

[4:07:17] Planner McCargar: meetings. Is that correct, Lisa?

[4:07:21] Voice 3: That is correct.

[4:07:22] Planner McCargar: So if you could just be really clear and indicate

[4:07:25] Planner McCargar: which meetings where that would be very helpful so

[4:07:32] Trustee Stamford: we're going to do september on keats in person

[4:07:36] Trustee Stamford: i think it's a good idea to do an in-person meeting once in a while anyway so my suggestion

[4:07:46] Trustee Stamford: is march um in person at john braithwaite and then a tentative june on gambier in person

[4:08:03] Voice 4: does that

[4:08:04] Trustee Stamford: make sense john uh joe sure

[4:08:07] Voice 5: i note that the uh motion that we just passed a little

[4:08:14] Voice 5: while ago seems to be says gabriel and that gambler or it was on the screen

[4:08:20] Voice 5: i think there's a typo we can fix

[4:08:24] Trustee Luckham: that yeah i'm hoping i'm hoping we haven't changed gabriel's

[4:08:28] Trustee Luckham: plans i'd get blamed don't

[4:08:32] Voice 5: wonder don't wonder why we're there

[4:08:36] Trustee Luckham: okay i only like want to say that

[4:08:43] Trustee Luckham: you know if we're meeting in person it's kind of nice to have a good reason for it because

[4:08:47] Trustee Luckham: there are additional expenses so just say that well

[4:08:53] Voice 5: not to mention the travel

[4:08:56] Voice 5: hassle it's not that easy getting from well

[4:08:58] Trustee Luckham: yeah that's part of the part of the expenses

[4:09:01] Trustee Luckham: i'm gonna ask overnight somewhere and i don't know long weekend sounds like a bad idea to travel on

[4:09:10] Trustee Luckham: what can i say okay um we need a motion to adopt these and indicate whether or not they're in

[4:09:18] Trustee Luckham: person or not you

[4:09:22] Voice 4: have it on the i've

[4:09:24] Trustee Luckham: lost track it's on page um 170 oh my screen went blank that's

[4:09:32] Trustee Luckham: weird do

[4:09:38] Voice 5: you think we should schedule the september meeting september second meeting on

[4:09:42] Voice 5: keats at a later time than usual in order to make it feasible for you to travel that morning

[4:09:48] Voice 5: as opposed to traveling the monday

[4:09:58] Trustee Luckham: it's

[4:10:00] Trustee Stamford: getting more and more challenging to to travel so

[4:10:03] Trustee Luckham: i think

[4:10:04] Trustee Luckham: it's a mess no matter what and staff have to get there as well as me and um in reality

[4:10:12] Trustee Luckham: In reality,

[4:10:16] Trustee Luckham: I'm going

[4:10:18] Trustee Luckham: to stay overnight in Nanaimo or something, you know.

[4:10:21] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, because I can't do Thursdays.

[4:10:25] Trustee Stamford: That's sort of my big thing.

[4:10:26] Trustee Stamford: But I can't tweak around other than that.

[4:10:33] Voice 5: Well, the following week could be feasible, Marlis, instead of September 2nd.

[4:10:40] Planner McCargar: Lisa's a little more familiar with the schedule.

[4:10:42] Planner McCargar: The

[4:10:44] Voice 3: following week, the Tuesday the 9th,

[4:10:49] Trustee Luckham: there

[4:10:50] Voice 3: is another LTC meeting scheduled that day, but there is a greater management meeting.

[4:11:06] Voice 3: So there's nothing that conflicts with any of the trustees or Chair Luckham's schedule on the 9th.

[4:11:12] Voice 3: let's do the ninth

[4:11:14] Planner McCargar: lisa is that an ltc that i'm involved in yeah no

[4:11:20] Voice 3: it's a southern ltc okay

[4:11:22] Voice 3: thanks um and we can change it to the ninth we don't we won't know for a little while if the

[4:11:30] Voice 3: keats venue is available for that date although they seem to have slightly more availability

[4:11:35] Voice 3: outside of july and august dates for

[4:11:39] Trustee Luckham: sure that's

[4:11:42] Voice 5: you know quite apart from the inconvenience for

[4:11:44] Voice 5: Peter to sort of dart over there you know before the long weekend is over of course Marlis and any

[4:11:50] Voice 5: other staff that might attend would be facing the same hassle and

[4:11:56] Voice 3: Marlis can I ask uh should the

[4:11:59] Voice 3: Keats meeting start at a later time than 10 a.m for travel purposes we'd

[4:12:07] Planner McCargar: have to look at the

[4:12:08] Planner McCargar: schedule I know with the ferry schedule we typically start Gambier at 11 because that works

[4:12:13] Planner McCargar: as well, but I'm not sure. We'd have to

[4:12:16] Planner McCargar: check the ferry schedule going to Keats.

[4:12:39] Trustee Stamford: There's an

[4:12:40] Trustee Stamford: 840. This changes in the summers a bit, but there's an 840

[4:12:44] Trustee Stamford: and then there's 1125 coming into Keats Landing. I don't

[4:12:50] Trustee Stamford: know if that helps you at all.

[4:12:54] Planner McCargar: We could probably start it earlier.

[4:12:58] Planner McCargar: 840 and 1130, I believe.

[4:13:01] Planner McCargar: It

[4:13:01] Trustee Stamford: does change over the summer, but now we have no

[4:13:05] Trustee Stamford: know FAC so who knows my

[4:13:13] Planner McCargar: suggestion would be to take to do March in North Vancouver and then June

[4:13:19] Planner McCargar: in on Gambier and at least those are the two that we can then we know we've sort of met the

[4:13:25] Planner McCargar: requirement to have two in person and then September we can book the venue tentatively

[4:13:30] Planner McCargar: and maybe that's the one that we can move to electronic if it's a light agenda or

[4:13:35] Planner McCargar: Or maybe we go back to Gambier if there is something specific to the OCP project.

[4:13:42] Planner McCargar: But I just, yeah, that's my only hesitation is sort of leaving it too late in the season without the in-person meetings.

[4:13:48] Planner McCargar: Then it gets even more challenging for travel with weather.

[4:13:52] Voice 5: Well, I'd like us to maintain that meeting at Keats in September if we can, whether it's on the 2nd or the 9th.

[4:14:00] Voice 5: But, you know, I can go with whichever one the preference is in terms of convenience.

[4:14:05] Voice 5: and I think September 9th would be the one to go with.

[4:14:15] Voice 5: So how do we do this?

[4:14:17] Trustee Luckham: We need a motion.

[4:14:19] Trustee Luckham: We

[4:14:19] Voice 4: need to see it.

[4:14:25] Voice 3: I'll put the motion up.

[4:14:27] Voice 3: I think if you just say as amended, schedule as amended,

[4:14:30] Voice 3: then that will capture everything that you've just asked for

[4:14:34] Voice 3: and confirm what I do have is January 2025's electronic march

[4:14:41] Voice 3: is North Vancouver in the evening.

[4:14:44] Voice 3: Is that correct?

[4:14:47] Trustee Stamford: potentially yeah

[4:14:48] Voice 3: okay uh june um gambier island uh september is keats and we will move that to

[4:14:55] Voice 3: september 9th if it's available uh november is electronic and then we go into january and march

[4:15:01] Voice 3: of uh 2026 um which would kind of be a repeat so oh

[4:15:09] Trustee Stamford: i can make the motion sure i

[4:15:11] Trustee Stamford: move that the

[4:15:13] Trustee Stamford: The Gambler Island Local Trust Committee approves their January 2025 to March 2026 meeting schedule as amended.

[4:15:24] Voice 5: Second.

[4:15:26] Trustee Luckham: Moved and seconded.

[4:15:28] Trustee Luckham: Brilliant.

[4:15:29] Trustee Luckham: Everybody clear?

[4:15:31] Trustee Luckham: All those in favor?

[4:15:33] Trustee Luckham: Any opposed?

[4:15:35] Trustee Luckham: None opposed?

[4:15:37] Trustee Luckham: Let's hope it all works out.

[4:15:41] Trustee Luckham: I'm going to go to 12.3.

[4:15:43] Trustee Luckham: If that's okay, Lisa, you're happy?

[4:15:46] Voice 3: I'm happy.

[4:15:47] Voice 3: Thank you, Chair.

[4:15:48] Voice 3: chair back

[4:15:48] Trustee Luckham: that's great trust conservancy report highlights of october the 16th uh from the board

[4:15:55] Trustee Luckham: meeting that's actually nice to see these highlights and that's a new thing and that's

[4:16:00] Trustee Luckham: very helpful kate louise stanford you may have been responsible for getting that started

[4:16:05] Trustee Luckham: no

[4:16:06] Trustee Stamford: i'm responsible for nothing oh

[4:16:08] Trustee Luckham: i see okay um so that's that for our information i'm not

[4:16:14] Trustee Luckham: going to belabor it too much it's great to have those reports and the trust the conservancy the

[4:16:19] Trustee Luckham: heron the fall edition of that um is there also and i encourage you to circulate that to your

[4:16:25] Trustee Luckham: friends and family um i get a paper copy it's kind of a luxury actually um and that's fabulous

[4:16:33] Trustee Luckham: applications report dated november the 13th on page 179 um staff do you have any updates on any

[4:16:41] Trustee Luckham: of that or just questions from trustees would be something then we'll go to anything on the

[4:16:47] Trustee Luckham: applications report nope uh trustee and local expense reports that's there for your information

[4:16:57] Trustee Luckham: um any concerns should be raised with nancy rogers i believe um the victoria office so i'll just

[4:17:05] Trustee Luckham: receive that for information adopted policies and standing resolutions unless there's a desire to

[4:17:11] Trustee Luckham: to change something just receive that for information first nation's relationship building

[4:17:17] Trustee Luckham: updates anybody have anything cool what's happening with squamish or otherwise no okay

[4:17:25] Trustee Luckham: there's lots of there's lots of work going on we're doing our best it's a good thing local

[4:17:30] Trustee Luckham: trust committee web page unless there's something dramatic that needs to be changed there it'll just

[4:17:36] Trustee Luckham: be updated in its regular course of events so here we come to active projects report and future

[4:17:43] Trustee Luckham: projects report and um i don't know if staff have any suggestions at this point we've obviously just

[4:17:53] Trustee Luckham: advanced the um keats shoreline conservation project and uh that might certainly our next

[4:18:01] Trustee Luckham: meeting will have the opportunity to fill up those spaces and i think we need to stand up to the

[4:18:08] Trustee Luckham: the commitment we've made with respect to guidelines and and or information approval

[4:18:14] Trustee Luckham: bylaw and perhaps we should have a some kind of a report on options for that but i'll leave that

[4:18:20] Trustee Luckham: to you guys through

[4:18:23] Planner McCargar: the chair i was just going to say if the ltc would like i could come back

[4:18:27] Planner McCargar: with a report to the next meeting that has a sort of a project prioritization report so it would

[4:18:33] Planner McCargar: outline the projects that are on the current future projects list and I can do a bit of a

[4:18:40] Planner McCargar: timeline associated and then the LTC can choose which project they want to prioritize and then

[4:18:47] Planner McCargar: the next step would be creating a project charter and getting it started.

[4:18:54] Trustee Luckham: Okay and so would that

[4:18:55] Trustee Luckham: include options for guidelines or approval information by law?

[4:19:01] Planner McCargar: Well I see that the DAI

[4:19:03] Planner McCargar: is already on the future projects list um with the options for developing draft guidelines

[4:19:15] Planner McCargar: that would be i'm still a little bit unsure that would be an amendment i suppose to this

[4:19:21] Planner McCargar: to the dpa would that be was that sort of what was being proposed i

[4:19:25] Trustee Luckham: think i'm honestly interested

[4:19:27] Trustee Luckham: in what the professional opinion would be on how to handle that so if you can embrace that into

[4:19:34] Trustee Luckham: to that because I think we want to advance that but trustee bernardo yeah

[4:19:40] Voice 5: more or less repeating

[4:19:42] Voice 5: what I said before we were having a discussion my strong preference would be to turn them into

[4:19:48] Voice 5: you know it's more complicated but to offer them up as amendments to the bylaw so that the

[4:19:54] Voice 5: guidelines are worked right into the bylaw yeah now

[4:19:58] Voice 5: although I am open to hearing from staff about

[4:20:03] Voice 5: So I think what might be determinative, might be, not sure, is the nature of the guidelines that staff thinks will be workable.

[4:20:13] Voice 5: And I think we have to look at them first before we make a real firm decision about where we want them to be, whether we want them to be in a kind of a general guidance document, which I'm wary about because I could see that taking a lot more time.

[4:20:28] Voice 5: And my strong preference is to simply just deal with this one thing and get it done.

[4:20:31] Voice 5: so that's why I'm leaning towards the amendment idea but I think it will I it's pretty hard to

[4:20:37] Voice 5: be firm about any of this stuff until we see what the staff can develop so I would ask staff to

[4:20:46] Voice 5: develop a proposal as to you know unless it's really easy to come up with the guidelines

[4:20:51] Voice 5: but just bring them to the next meeting but develop a proposal for how to develop the

[4:20:56] Voice 5: guidelines then we'll look at them and then we'll decide what to do with them how does that sound

[4:21:00] Voice 5: so

[4:21:10] Trustee Luckham: plan mccarver um were on the active projects and future projects a summary report of those

[4:21:19] Trustee Luckham: projects sounded like a good suggestion embracing some of these this other more

[4:21:25] Trustee Luckham: thoughtful aspects of it i think could be included in um that summary sort of trying to expand that

[4:21:35] Trustee Luckham: what that might look like because until we actually have the conversation we don't know

[4:21:38] Trustee Luckham: what it's going to look like no

[4:21:41] Planner McCargar: i can maybe provide some information on what those guidelines

[4:21:45] Planner McCargar: would look like within a dai bylaw and what those guidelines would look like as amending the yeah

[4:21:53] Voice 4: it

[4:21:54] Planner McCargar: just it feels like a yeah to start the conversation about amending the dpa before

[4:21:59] Planner McCargar: it's even been adopted um yeah it feels

[4:22:02] Planner McCargar: a little odd yeah

[4:22:04] Trustee Luckham: well we'll deal with that in due course

[4:22:06] Trustee Luckham: Okay. Yeah.

[4:22:10] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I'm not worried about that part. I think, you know, we made a commitment

[4:22:15] Trustee Stamford: to try and make this work. Yeah. I don't

[4:22:19] Planner McCargar: care if it looks odd. Yeah. But

[4:22:21] Planner McCargar: the LTC is open to

[4:22:23] Planner McCargar: seeing the option in a DAI bylaw or as an amendment. Is that correct? Okay. I would

[4:22:28] Trustee Luckham: like to keep the door open until we know what we're talking about. Because I think we need to,

[4:22:31] Trustee Luckham: There's a lot of confusion amongst trustees about what a DAI actually is, and me included.

[4:22:38] Trustee Luckham: And so if we have it spelled out, then it'll be clear to us.

[4:22:41] Trustee Luckham: Because there is an OCP amendment required, if I'm not mistaken, to enable a DAI.

[4:22:47] Trustee Luckham: But it's minor.

[4:22:49] Trustee Luckham: It's administrative.

[4:22:50] Trustee Luckham: It doesn't require any kind of real work.

[4:22:55] Trustee Luckham: In fact, you may be able to wait public hearing.

[4:22:57] Trustee Luckham: I don't know about that.

[4:22:57] Trustee Luckham: But anyway.

[4:22:58] Voice 5: I'm not too worried about oddness either.

[4:23:00] Voice 5: we passed that threshold a long time ago so we're

[4:23:06] Trustee Luckham: special so just so i'm clear

[4:23:09] Planner McCargar: do we want a report

[4:23:10] Planner McCargar: that outlines all of the projects on the project list including this one or is this

[4:23:15] Planner McCargar: am i coming back with just specifically um the dai and the amendment no

[4:23:20] Trustee Luckham: that's a good that's a

[4:23:21] Trustee Luckham: great question we're narrowing the scope uh what

[4:23:24] Voice 4: can we just say

[4:23:25] Trustee Luckham: oh go ahead

[4:23:26] Voice 4: i'm

[4:23:28] Voice 5: just gonna ask

[4:23:28] Voice 5: marla's like uh what's realistic you know like i've got the bug bearer that i want these particular

[4:23:34] Voice 5: guidelines worked on so i i just saw one way or the other i want to see them come to the top of

[4:23:38] Voice 5: the list so however you can manage that i'd be happy to see that but if you think you could do

[4:23:45] Voice 5: all of it at once great but if you think realistically your your time and attention

[4:23:52] Voice 5: resources and all that stuff uh are more limited then i would want a stronger focus on the

[4:23:58] Voice 5: the guidelines that we just talked about earlier.

[4:24:00] Trustee Luckham: Yeah. Obviously, you're going to have to talk to

[4:24:02] Trustee Luckham: your manager, to Rene. But January 28th would be the ideal delivery date.

[4:24:09] Planner McCargar: Well, and I think if the

[4:24:10] Planner McCargar: LTC is clear that this is the next priority project, what way it looks will be determined.

[4:24:17] Planner McCargar: But then I think that there's probably not a point to bring back a report that includes every single

[4:24:21] Planner McCargar: project on the future project list. If this has already been identified as the next

[4:24:25] Planner McCargar: next step then i can just bring back a report on on on this

[4:24:30] Trustee Luckham: so i see nodding heads so let's do that

[4:24:33] Trustee Luckham: so let's get that

[4:24:34] Trustee Luckham: effect um

[4:24:37] Trustee Stamford: so just i i see this as yes this is where we go it's it's that

[4:24:42] Trustee Stamford: particular dai and then once we see what it looks like then then we move into where it can fit in

[4:24:49] Trustee Stamford: other areas so yeah so motion as presented so used to doing that at um the rd is we don't

[4:24:59] Trustee Stamford: we don't speak them which i don't like but um whereas do we have i

[4:25:06] Trustee Luckham: wouldn't want to draw the

[4:25:07] Trustee Luckham: regional districts established i

[4:25:10] Trustee Stamford: yeah i don't i don't agree with the way they do it do you have

[4:25:13] Trustee Stamford: a motion joe or do you want god

[4:25:16] Voice 5: no um god

[4:25:18] Trustee Stamford: no i

[4:25:19] Voice 5: just i'm just

[4:25:22] Voice 5: i'm just frankly following trying

[4:25:25] Voice 5: to follow where planner mccarver is at in terms of how to organize this and well

[4:25:30] Trustee Luckham: i think it's it's

[4:25:31] Trustee Luckham: actually clear and i might suggest that the gambler on local trust committee requests staff

[4:25:35] Trustee Luckham: to provide a report on options for pursuing guidelines or development approval information

[4:25:43] Trustee Luckham: by-law options for Gambier-Keats trust area. It's close enough.

[4:26:00] Voice 5: I mean, do we really need

[4:26:01] Voice 5: a resolution in order to direct staff to do this? Yes.

[4:26:04] Trustee Luckham: It's safer that way. Yeah.

[4:26:12] Trustee Luckham: Chair Luckman,

[4:26:13] Voice 3: could you repeat that

[4:26:14] Trustee Luckham: motion, please? I was afraid you'd ask that. So it moves

[4:26:18] Trustee Luckham: that the Gambier LTC requests staff

[4:26:22] Trustee Luckham: for a report outlining options

[4:26:26] Trustee Luckham: of guidelines

[4:26:30] Trustee Luckham: or development approval information bylaw

[4:26:36] Trustee Luckham: for the Keats.

[4:26:39] Trustee Luckham: I think we know what the discussion has been.

[4:26:43] Trustee Luckham: For Gambier-Keats Trust Area.

[4:26:46] Voice 5: We need to have language in there that connects the

[4:26:49] Voice 5: guidelines to the additions dp3 concept

[4:26:53] Trustee Luckham: yeah and that's um where i i didn't say why

[4:26:59] Voice 5: don't we uh

[4:26:59] Voice 5: why don't we put the text we have now up in the screen and i'll have a quick look at it maybe i

[4:27:03] Voice 5: can wing something here

[4:27:05] Trustee Luckham: because the dii would apply to the um entire area presumably well we

[4:27:14] Voice 5: can actually put that to the side until we figure until we actually see some guidelines and then

[4:27:18] Voice 5: of decide what to do with them.

[4:27:22] Trustee Luckham: Yeah. Is this okay? Is this going in the right direction,

[4:27:28] Trustee Luckham: Marlis?

[4:27:29] Planner McCargar: Yeah, I think so. I was just thinking if it was maybe a little bit more specific along

[4:27:35] Planner McCargar: what Trustee Bernardo was going on, but to provide a report on options for DPA-3 guidelines for QEP

[4:27:43] Planner McCargar: requirements on additions and DAI bylaw options for the Gambier Local Trust Area, something like

[4:27:49] Planner McCargar: that

[4:27:49] Voice 5: that's great that sounds pretty good let's put that language in there okay let's see mccarver

[4:27:58] Planner McCargar: did you catch that lisa if

[4:28:00] Voice 3: you could repeat that please sure

[4:28:04] Planner McCargar: so request staff to provide

[4:28:06] Planner McCargar: a report on options for dpa3 guidelines for qep requirements on additions and

[4:28:15] Planner McCargar: and DAI bylaw options for the Gambier Local Trust Area.

[4:28:21] Voice 5: Perfect, thank you.

[4:28:23] Planner McCargar: Perfect.

[4:28:27] Trustee Luckham: Is that your motion?

[4:28:28] Trustee Luckham: Did we all understand that?

[4:28:31] Trustee Luckham: Yes.

[4:28:32] Trustee Luckham: Are you still with us there?

[4:28:34] Trustee Luckham: Yes, you are.

[4:28:37] Trustee Luckham: We're waiting for it to come up on the screen.

[4:28:45] Voice 3: Marvis, are you putting that up or am I putting that up?

[4:28:47] Voice 3: Oh, if you could put that up, that'd be great.

[4:28:48] Voice 3: Okay.

[4:29:13] Voice 3: Sorry, I just had a momentary glitch.

[4:29:16] Voice 3: I'll have it right.

[4:30:15] Trustee Luckham: So is that it there?

[4:30:20] Voice 9: No.

[4:30:21] Voice 9: Okay.

[4:30:39] Voice 3: This is what I have so far, that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[4:30:43] Voice 3: request staff to provide a report on options for DPA 3 guidelines

[4:30:48] Voice 3: for qualified environment professional requirements for additions

[4:30:51] Voice 3: and DAI guidelines for, and I need it finished off.

[4:31:00] Voice 5: Well, I think that's Gambier Trust's area, isn't it?

[4:31:39] Voice 3: Were there further edits, Arliss?

[4:31:46] Planner McCargar: I think that's just, that's the general idea. I don't know if the LTC agrees that's the best wording, but I think that gets the message across.

[4:31:57] Voice 5: If you're satisfied, Marlis, that gives you the direction you need, then we might as well stop fussing. I'm happy to just go with that.

[4:32:09] Voice 5: So, Peter, is that your motion?

[4:32:11] Voice 4: I think that is, yeah.

[4:32:15] Trustee Luckham: All

[4:32:15] Voice 5: right, I'll second that.

[4:32:16] Voice 5: that right thank

[4:32:20] Trustee Luckham: you moved and seconded the motion on the screen uh any further discussion

[4:32:26] Trustee Luckham: all those in favor that carries unanimously excellent looking very much forward to that work

[4:32:35] Trustee Luckham: um and let us continue on is i don't believe there's anything further here

[4:32:42] Trustee Luckham: um yep so we'll just receive the other reporting for information at this time so our

[4:32:49] Trustee Luckham: Our next meeting is January the 28th.

[4:32:52] Trustee Luckham: Of course, we'll see you at Council coming up here next week.

[4:32:58] Trustee Luckham: And thank you for today's discussions.

[4:33:00] Trustee Luckham: And we'll move on and keep these balls rolling.

[4:33:05] Trustee Luckham: Thank you, everybody.

[4:33:07] Trustee Luckham: See you

[4:33:07] Trustee Stamford: next week, everyone.

[4:33:09] Trustee Luckham: Call the meeting adjourned.

[4:33:10] Trustee Luckham: All those in favor?

[4:33:12] Trustee Luckham: That carries.

[4:33:13] Trustee Luckham: Okay, thank you.

[4:33:16] Voice 9: Thanks, everybody.

[4:33:17] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  1 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
                                      Gambier Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Regular Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
November 26, 2024 
Electronic Meeting 
 
Members Present: Peter Luckham, Chair 
 Kate-Louise Stamford, Trustee 
 Joe Bernardo, Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Marlis McCargar, Island Planner 
 Ian Cox, Planner 2  
Margot Thomaidis, Planner 2 
 Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder 
  
Others Present: There were approximately two (2) members of the public in attendance. 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
Chair Luckham called the meeting to order at 10:00 am. He acknowledged that the meeting was 
held on the territory of the Coast Salish First Nations. 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
By general consent, the agenda was approved as presented. 
3. REPORTS 
3.1 Trustee Reports 
Trustee Stamford did not provide a report. 
 
Trustee Bernardo reported the following: 
• Financial Planning Committee making good progress due, in part, to Interim Chief 
Administrative Officer’s work in developing a more structured meeting process; and 
• Conveyed appreciation on behalf of Keats Island community to the Sunshine Coast 
Regional District for providing funding for Keats Landing dock. 
3.2 Chair's Report 
Chair Luckham reported the following: 
• New Chief Administrative Officer, Reuben Bronee, has commenced work and 
acknowledged contributions of interim Chief Administrative Officer Mobbs; and 
• Preparing for Trust Council meeting taking place next week. 
3.3 Electoral Area Director's Report 

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  2 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
Director Stamford reported the following: 
• Sunshine Coast Regional District has begun budget discussions with $268,000 
allocated to next year’s budget for Keats Landing dock and feasibility study for New 
Brighton dock should the dock come under the jurisdiction of the Regional District; 
• BC Ferries announced the dismantling of Ferry Advisory Committees with new 
engagement mechanism to be developed; 
• Co-hosted Howe Sound Community Forum and highlighted attendance by MP 
Patrick Weiler and new MLA Randene Neill; 
• Hosted workshop for Gambier southwest peninsula residents featuring discussions 
on how Islands Trust and Sunshine Coast Regional District taxes work and the New 
Brighton dock issue; and 
• Regional District has commenced search for new Chief Executive Officer. 
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - none 
5. MINUTES 
5.1 Local Trust Committee Meeting dated October 1, 2024 - for adoption 
By general consent, the Local Trust Committee meeting minutes of October 1, 
2024 were adopted. 
5.2 Section 26 Resolutions-Without-Meeting Report - none 
5.3 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes - none 
6. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES 
6.1 Follow-up Action List dated November 19, 2024 
Received for information. 
7. DELEGATIONS - none 
8. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS 
8.1 GM-DVP-2023.4 (Joos) - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• Development Variance Permit to authorize a reduction of the setback from the 
natural boundary of the sea for an existing single family dwelling and deck; 
• Dwelling cannot achieve setback requirements due to steepness of the property; 
• A portion of the deck structure extends beyond property boundaries and into the 
foreshore; and 
• Maintaining the existing deck structure would require Crown foreshore tenure and a 
rezoning as current zoning does not permit deck structures. 
 
The applicant was in attendance and noted the deck was in place when the property 
was purchased and it is the only means of transporting goods from the dock to the land; 
therefore, removal of the deck would cause a safety issue.  

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  3 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments and clarifications were noted: 
• When subdivision was approved, the building sites were not included on the 
subdivision layout and a geotechnical study done at the time indicated a 7.5 metre 
setback would be sufficient; however, anyone building on the subdivision sites was 
still required to follow the land use bylaw that specified a 15 metre setback 
requirement; and 
• The deck is the only way to access the property safely and a rezoning of the 
foreshore area would be a lengthy and uncertain process; but if the deck size was 
adjusted to be completely located on the applicant’s property, an application for a 0 
metre setback could be undertaken. 
 
GM-2024-049 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of 
Development Variance Permit GM-DVP-2023.4 to reduce the minimum setback 
to the natural boundary of the sea from 15 metres to 10.10 metres to allow 
siting of existing single family dwelling. 
CARRIED 
8.2 GM-DVP-2023.2/GM-DP-2023.1 (Delane & Cumming) - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• Development is located in Development Permit Area 3 (DPA 3) Riparian Areas; 
• Applicant has withdrawn application GM-DVP-2023.2 due to change of building 
plans that no longer require the variances for multiple accessory buildings as shown 
on the draft DVP site plan and Schedules; 
• Local Trust Committee only needs to consider GM-DP-2023.1 as presented in the 
draft DP and attached Schedules; 
• Staff have received the provincially accepted Riparian Areas Protection Regulation 
(RAPR) Detailed Assessment Report and consider the development to meet the 
Development Permit Area Guidelines; and 
• Public concern with the location of the septic system as received in response to the 
DVP notice, should be addressed following its relocation outside the setback area 
with no LTC decision needed regarding setbacks variances. Further, septic systems 
are the jurisdiction of the Health Authority via a Registered Onsite Wastewater 
Practitioner (ROWP) and the Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) for its 
location in relation to the watercourses. 
 
Applicant was in attendance and concurred with the staff report.  
 
A Trustee noted the property is challenging to develop, had previously been heavily 
cleared, and is located in a watershed area in a well-established subdivision.  
 
GM-2024-050 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of GM-DP-
2023.1 with the condition that the development is in accordance with the 

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  4 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
Riparian Areas Protection Regulation Detailed Assessment Report by Cascade 
Environmental Ltd. attached to and forming part of the development permit. 
CARRIED 
8.3  GM-LTC-2024-11-26_GM-SUB-2022.2_Covenant-Signature-Request 
 
The Planner summarized the staff report and indicated two Section 219 covenants are 
required as a condition of the subdivision application with one prohibiting further 
subdivision of Proposed Lot “L” and Lot “I”, and the second preventing installation of 
private docks.   
 
Discussion ensued and it was clarified that the effect of the covenants will impose 
conditions that will travel with the land regardless of ownership. 
 
GM-2024-051 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee accept the covenants under 
Section 219 of the Land Title Act from the registered owners of PIDs 015-980-
324 and 027-998-967 and designate the Chair of the Gambier Island Local Trust 
Committee to sign the covenants for GM-SUB-2022.2. 
CARRIED 
The meeting was recessed for a break at 10:55 a.m. and reconvened at 11:06 a.m. 
9. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS 
9.1 Minor Project: Keats Shoreline Protection Project - Post Public Hearing Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and noted the following: 
• Bylaw 153 is an Official Community Plan amendment designating a shoreline 
Development Protection Area and Bylaw 154 is a Land Use Bylaw amendment 
updating regulations for marine structures, exemptions from setback requirements, 
and introduces dock construction shoreline modifications and vegetation 
restoration; 
• Several Community Information Meetings and a Public Hearing were conducted; 
• A motion introducing an exemption for building additions was put forth at the 
previous Local Trust Committee meeting; and 
• Next steps are to withdraw or defeat the motion and proceed with the bylaw 
readings, carry the motion and amend the bylaw to include the exemption, or 
defeat the bylaws. 
 
The Chair read the motion that had been tabled at the previous meeting as follows: 
   GM-2024-052 
   It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that proposed Bylaw No. 154 be amended by the insertion of the following 
exemption as subsection 9.3.2(c):  

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  5 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
Additions to pre-existing buildings, structures, and utilities situated between 7.5 
metres and 15 metres from the natural boundary of the sea, provided always 
that: 
i.  no part of the work may involve the use of earth moving machinery or the 
removal of native tree species; 
ii. the addition does not exceed 50 square metres (540 square feet) in area 
and must be erected on previously disturbed land; and 
iii. the work does not result in environmental degradation of any kind 
anywhere within DP3 or to the ecology of the foreshore. 
DEFEATED 
Trustee Bernardo requested his vote in favour be recorded. 
 
Discussion ensued on the motion and the following comments were noted: 
• Public comments indicated opposition to the bylaw and the amendments proposed 
throughout the process have tried to address the areas of public comment; 
• Discussion, debate, and amendments made to date recognized community needs; 
however, the proposed amendment to allow addition of up to 540 square feet in 
size should require reporting from a qualified professional to determine if any 
environmental impacts would result; 
• A 7.5 metre setback to the sea has been identified as inadequate for a foreshore 
protection area; 
• A 540 square foot addition is substantial and each circumstance needs to be looked 
at individually and this is why a Development Permit Area exists; 
• Moving development outside of the permit area does not respect the reality of the 
lot sizes at Keats Landing and, if any expansion is required, there is not an option to 
do so outside of the Development Permit Area; 
• Ability to request expert reports provides assurance that steps are being taken to 
reduce impact as much as possible for each particular scenario; 
• The land in which an addition could be built is already disturbed and residents 
should be allowed to make use of their yards; 
• Objection is based on imposing an unnecessary requirement on residents through a 
permit process; 
• Existing residents may take good care of their land, but land gets sold and there is 
risk by allowing continued development in the foreshore; and 
• If motion is defeated, there should be consideration of developing guidelines that 
would provide an easier development permit process for the applicant. 
 
The meeting recessed for a break at 12:15 p.m. and reconvened at 12:45 p.m. 
Discussion continued, the vote on motion GM-2024-052 was called and the motion was 
defeated. 
Discussion ensued about drafting guidelines applicable to development permit 
applications made by applicants wishing to build an addition and the following 
comments were noted:  
• Process for developing guidelines could be undertaken as a minor project; 

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  6 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
• Guidelines should include a limited number of questions to be asked of a qualified 
environmental professional and details that provide direction to applicants and 
staff; and 
• Development Approval Information (DAI) Bylaw is a tool used to provide this type of 
information. 
GM-2024-053 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that Gambier Island Local Trust committee request staff to develop draft 
guidelines applicable to development permit applications made by applicants 
seeking to build additions to pre-existing dwellings in Development Permit Area 
3 (DPA 3). 
CARRIED 
 
Trustee Bernardo stated for the record that he is opposed to the Bylaw Nos. 153 and 
154 for reasons provided previously. 
 
GM-2024-054 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 153, cited as 'Keats 
Island Official Community Plan, 2002, Amendment No. 1, 2021', be read a third 
time. 
CARRIED 
Trustee Bernardo requested his vote in opposition be recorded. 
GM-2024-055 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee proposed Bylaw No. 153, cited 
as ‘'Keats Island Official Community Plan, 2002, Amendment No. 1, 2021’ be 
forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs for approval.  
CARRIED 
Trustee Bernardo requested his vote in opposition be recorded. 
GM-2024-056 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 154, cited as ‘Keats 
Island Land Use Bylaw, 2002, Amendment No. 1, 2021’, be read a third time. 
CARRIED 
Trustee Bernardo requested his vote in opposition be recorded. 
GM-2024-057 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee proposed Bylaw No. 153, cited 
as ‘'Keats Island Official Community Plan, 2002, Amendment No. 1, 2021’ and 
proposed Bylaw No. 154 cited as ‘Keats Island Land Use Bylaw, 2002, 

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  7 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
Amendment No. 1, 2021’, be forwarded to the Secretary of the Islands Trust for 
Executive Committee approval. 
CARRIED 
Trustee Bernardo requested his vote in opposition be recorded. 
10. CORRESPONDENCE - none 
(Correspondence received concerning current applications or projects is posted to the LTC 
webpage) 
11. NEW BUSINESS - none 
12. STAFF REPORTS 
12.1 Phase 4 Community Engagement Options - Policy Statement Amendment Project 
(PSAP) - Staff Report 
The Senior Policy Advisor summarized the staff report and outlined options available to 
the Local Trust Committee regarding community engagement on the Islands Trust draft 
Policy Statement.  
Discussion ensued.  
 
GM-2024-058 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that Gambier Island Local Trust Committee select Engagement Option No. 5 
specifically an online town hall opportunity separate from the Local Trust 
Committee meeting and consideration of a mail out communication prior to the 
online town hall for Phase 4 Community Engagement about the new draft 
Islands Trust Policy Statement. 
CARRIED  
12.2 Draft 2025/26 Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Annual Meeting Schedule - 
Request for Decision 
Discussion ensued and the following amendments were made to the proposed 
schedule: 
• March meeting to be held in North Vancouver; 
• June meeting to be held on Gambier Island; 
• September meeting be moved to September 9 if Keats Island venue is available; and  
• Remainder of meetings to be held electronically. 
   GM-2024-059 
that Gambier Island Local Trust Committee approve their January, 2025 to 
March, 2026 Meeting Schedule as amended. 
CARRIED 
12.3 Trust Conservancy Report - Highlights of October 1st, 2024 Board Meeting 
  Received for information. 

ADOPTED 
 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED  8 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
November 26, 2024 
 
12.4 Trust Conservancy - The Heron - Fall Edition 
  Received for information. 
12.5 Applications Report dated November 19, 2024 
  Received for information. 
12.6 Trustee and Local Expense Report dated September, 2024 
  Received for information. 
12.7 Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions 
  Received for information. 
12.8 First Nations Relationship Building Update - none 
12.9 Local Trust Committee Webpage 
  No updates required at this time. 
13. WORK PROGRAM 
13.1 Active Projects Report dated November 19, 2024 
  Received for information. 
13.2 Future Projects Report dated November 19, 2024 
  Discussion about the next project was undertaken. 
GM-2024-060 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to provide a report on 
options for Development Permit Area 3 (DPA 3) guidelines for qualified 
environmental professional requirement for additions and Development 
Approval Information Bylaw guidelines for Gambier Island Local Trust Area. 
CARRIED 
14. UPCOMING MEETINGS 
14.1 Next Regular Meeting Scheduled to be January 28, 2025 to be held electronically. 
15. ADJOURNMENT 
By general consent, the meeting was adjourned at 2:33p.m. 
 
_________________________ 
Peter Luckham, Chair 
Certified Correct: 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder