Gambier Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, March 25, 2025

[0:00:00] Trustee Patrick: All right, I'd like to call to order this regular meeting of the Gambier-Keats Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:09] Trustee Patrick: We are live streaming and recording the meeting. The recording will be available in the coming days.

[0:00:15] Trustee Patrick: I respectfully acknowledge that we're meeting today on the unceded ancestral land of the Tsleil-Waututh, Squamish, and Musqueam First Nations.

[0:00:25] Trustee Patrick: I respectfully acknowledge that the lands and waters that encompass the Gambier and Keats local trust area have been home to Indigenous people since time immemorial.

[0:00:34] Trustee Patrick: As trustees, we're committed to reconciliation and to working together to preserve and protect this ecologically, culturally, and spiritually significant region in the Salish Sea.

[0:00:44] Trustee Patrick: This local trust area is located within the treaty lands and territories of many Coast Salish First Nations.

[0:00:52] Trustee Patrick: This local trust committee is committed to establishing and maintaining mutually respectful relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples, and we have made a commitment to reconciliation with the understanding that this commitment is a long-term relationship-building and healing process.

[0:01:09] Trustee Patrick: I'd like to make some introductions. I'm Laura Patrick. I'm new. I'm the newly elected chair of the Islands Trust and now the chair of this local trust committee.

[0:01:19] Trustee Patrick: I'd like to introduce trustee Joe Bernardo and trustee Kate Louise Stanford, and together we are your local trust committee.

[0:01:28] Trustee Patrick: We have some staff with us today. We have Marlis McGarger and we have Lisa Millard.

[0:01:33] Trustee Patrick: And do we have anyone on the line for staff? We do.

[0:01:36] Trustee Patrick: So Sonia Zupanek and Warren Digman are joining us in ether here and can see us through the video.

[0:01:45] Trustee Patrick: video. So this meeting is an official forum for your local trust committee to make decisions about

[0:01:54] Trustee Patrick: land use planning matters and to discuss relevant business. This is also a place of employment

[0:01:59] Trustee Patrick: and our staff have the right to a safe and respectful workplace. There will be times on

[0:02:05] Trustee Patrick: the agenda where the public can speak and I'll talk more about that in a moment, but we have

[0:02:10] Trustee Patrick: an agenda before us. Trustees, is there any additions or changes to the agenda? Not for me.

[0:02:15] Voice 12: and

[0:02:15] Trustee Patrick: we approve the agenda through general consent yep excellent um so we are going to begin with the

[0:02:23] Trustee Patrick: trustee reports and i turn to uh trustees who would like to go first well

[0:02:30] Voice 12: i'll go first because

[0:02:30] Voice 12: i have nothing to report because i'm going to keep it short okay

[0:02:36] Voice 9: um for islands trust i would

[0:02:40] Voice 9: just like to start off by welcoming all these gambier people this is incredible i'd love to

[0:02:47] Voice 9: see this um because i come from the uh southwest peninsula where there is a road network we do have

[0:02:55] Voice 9: um a public water taxi access um often we don't get to connect so this is a great opportunity to

[0:03:02] Voice 9: see everybody um i i also have been looking through this package and really want to commend

[0:03:09] Voice 9: the amount of work that our advisory planning commission was done trying to move uh concepts

[0:03:16] Voice 9: and principles to recommended wording as we begin this process for land use and OCP and

[0:03:25] Voice 9: land use work.

[0:03:27] Voice 9: An incredible amount of work coming from all over Vancouver, coming from the island to

[0:03:34] Voice 9: make sure that they fit within the criteria of an advisory climate commission.

[0:03:40] Voice 9: So I really, that was a huge amount of work they've done, and I hope to see more work

[0:03:45] Voice 9: going forward but um that was quite a challenge so far um

[0:03:51] Voice 10: some

[0:03:53] Voice 9: of the other activities that we've

[0:03:54] Voice 9: been uh i've seen on the island recently um reddit which is our um reach a rural economic

[0:04:08] Voice 9: development without the last comment to it but it's some funding that was received

[0:04:12] Voice 9: received by our community association to provide livability and economic initiatives for the

[0:04:24] Voice 9: island.

[0:04:25] Voice 9: One of the things they've been doing is recycling programs.

[0:04:31] Voice 9: I hope to see that across the island, but right now it's just been on the southwest

[0:04:35] Voice 9: peninsula.

[0:04:36] Voice 9: So that we've had two recycling pickups from them and that's helped that part of the island.

[0:04:42] Voice 9: and we'll see what kind of programs that they can accommodate across Gambier because that has

[0:04:49] Voice 9: been one of our challenges is our individual community nodes and that they don't connect

[0:04:55] Voice 9: and that that does make it difficult to provide island-wide programs

[0:05:00] Voice 9: but they are on notice that their reddit program is for everybody on Gambier

[0:05:07] Voice 9: here. For those of you that have seen my update, my Gambier email update that I sent last week

[0:05:17] Voice 9: with this package, I mentioned that I'd be speaking to our MLA, Brandy Neal, who's also

[0:05:24] Voice 9: the Minister of Water, Lands and Stewardship. I did ask her about whether or not Gambier or

[0:05:34] Voice 9: for House Al Dalkatza, which is part of Canone discussions

[0:05:40] Voice 9: with First Nations and the ministry about what would be seen

[0:05:46] Voice 9: as a similar dock management plan to Pender Harbour.

[0:05:50] Voice 9: Can

[0:05:50] Voice 7: you speak up a little bit, please?

[0:05:51] Voice 7: Okay.

[0:05:51] Voice 9: Thanks.

[0:05:52] Voice 9: And she said there is no discussions with her ministry that she knows of.

[0:05:59] Voice 9: She did mention that there are discussions in the Southern Gulf Islands

[0:06:04] Voice 9: and maybe Trustee Patrick would be able to add to that

[0:06:08] Voice 9: about those kinds of negotiations that are happening.

[0:06:12] Voice 9: But as far as she knows, there's nothing in Al-Qasim

[0:06:17] Voice 9: that's equivalent to the SWIA dock management plan

[0:06:22] Voice 9: that you currently have heard about on the Sunshine Coast.

[0:06:26] Voice 9: So I just wanted, I said I would ask that question of her

[0:06:29] Voice 9: and that was the response I got.

[0:06:31] Voice 9: up and finally uh just making sure we the federal election has been announced uh sometimes there is

[0:06:41] Voice 9: an election uh polling station on gambier and i will find out if it's going to happen this time

[0:06:48] Voice 9: i have heard that people have difficulty registering their gambier address

[0:06:54] Voice 9: on the federal site so I'm going to be looking into that as well to make sure and I will let

[0:07:02] Voice 9: everyone know if you are full-time on Gander you are voting that where the opportunities

[0:07:09] Voice 9: are so that's my islands trust report thank

[0:07:14] Trustee Patrick: you um I can't say too much more about the southern

[0:07:18] Trustee Patrick: gulf islands other than Emily Rob Botterall who's newly elected in um in our writing that

[0:07:23] Trustee Patrick: that covers the Southern Gulf Islands

[0:07:24] Trustee Patrick: is highly involved in that issue.

[0:07:29] Trustee Patrick: So if you have interests or concerns or questions for him,

[0:07:32] Trustee Patrick: just direct that to his staff

[0:07:34] Trustee Patrick: as he's leading that those conversations.

[0:07:38] Trustee Patrick: I don't have much to report either other than yes,

[0:07:40] Trustee Patrick: I am newly elected as a chair.

[0:07:43] Trustee Patrick: Our former chair, Peter Leckham has stepped down

[0:07:46] Trustee Patrick: and I was elected by my fellow peers,

[0:07:48] Trustee Patrick: all 26 of trustees for what's called Press Council,

[0:07:51] Trustee Patrick: which is the federation uh at our last recent meeting just a couple weeks ago we did approve

[0:07:56] Trustee Patrick: the budget 11.2 billion and if you want details i'd encourage you to go to our website there's

[0:08:02] Trustee Patrick: lots of information on on the um uh on our budget um and with that i think uh since there are so

[0:08:11] Trustee Patrick: many people in this room we're going to move on oops we do

[0:08:14] Voice 9: have an electoral area director

[0:08:16] Trustee Patrick: and she is here so

[0:08:18] Voice 9: i just i forgot i wanted to welcome uh laura patrick what did you say

[0:08:23] Voice 9: in salt spring we

[0:08:24] Trustee Patrick: probably didn't yes i'm uh elected and uh live on salt spring island so

[0:08:29] Voice 9: laura is well aware of having lots of people attend meetings and lots of planning issues um

[0:08:36] Voice 9: and so it's really i'm really pleased that we got laura to work with us until the end of the trip

[0:08:44] Voice 9: um another hat that i wear many of you know that i also am the area director

[0:08:50] Voice 9: for West Howe Sound and the islands for the Saatchi Coast Regional District.

[0:08:57] Voice 9: So on my other half, the regional district passed a budget of $70 million.

[0:09:05] Voice 9: The tax requisition for Barrett F Islands, which are the islands in Howe Sound,

[0:09:13] Voice 9: we're looking at approximately a 6% increase,

[0:09:16] Voice 9: increase which translates to be about three dollars per hundred thousand for your tax increase

[0:09:25] Voice 9: but that is just for the island's trust portion only there's a number for the regional district

[0:09:30] Voice 9: portion only there are other aspects of your rural tax you'll you'll see when it comes

[0:09:36] Voice 9: we've been focusing our our parties are water for the mainland it is a big issue on the sunshine

[0:09:45] Voice 9: high coast and solid waste so for those people who live on gambier your issue don't pay for the water

[0:09:52] Voice 9: service so that's not an issue for you but on keats uh there's there's communities on keats

[0:09:58] Voice 9: that do pay into the regional water and water is part of the program that's delivered to

[0:10:05] Voice 9: keats island we also solid waste is our other big push for moving forward at the regional district

[0:10:14] Voice 9: and you are part of that function you do pay into it with your your taxes the other big item that

[0:10:22] Voice 9: you pay taxes into is the public docs on the empire and if you got my email recently i did

[0:10:28] Voice 9: outline where the public docs are with the regional district and any activity around those

[0:10:34] Voice 9: and i have to ask answer questions around those later um we are on the regional district we are

[0:10:44] Voice 9: providing we are also going through an official community plan process for the whole region with

[0:10:50] Voice 9: the ultimate goal of taking seven regional or ocp plans and and creating one this does not impact

[0:10:59] Voice 9: gambier you have your own process and that's what we're talking about today but i'm in the delightful

[0:11:05] Voice 9: position of being involved with 10 different OCPs right now and all the

[0:11:14] Voice 9: complexities of that. So lots of work in that area. For those of you that use the

[0:11:24] Voice 9: Hopkins dock, I had good news months ago that Hopkins was going to be fixed for

[0:11:30] Voice 9: summer and two days before the work was to start it got delayed until August. It missed the marine

[0:11:39] Voice 9: work window from the federal government and so it will start work on repairing Hopkins Landing

[0:11:46] Voice 9: for public dock access and that includes people that do use it on Gambier and Keats.

[0:11:53] Voice 9: That will start in September, fingers crossed. The last thing I want to talk about is fire

[0:12:00] Voice 9: smart i had the privilege of visiting a fire smart designated community uh with a point on

[0:12:09] Voice 9: the mainland but i also want to acknowledge that um brigade bay had recently been given their the

[0:12:17] Voice 9: first um fire smart designation for all of the sunshine curves but second second um and that was

[0:12:26] Voice 9: really exciting and it was really good to be able to go to witherby point but yesterday um i also

[0:12:33] Voice 9: had updates on a house fire very close to witherby points right across from here and it just reminded

[0:12:41] Voice 9: me that we can do everything right we can have all this fire smarting in the world but a house fire

[0:12:48] Voice 9: is a different creature altogether and we all have to be vigilant on how we protect our properties

[0:12:55] Voice 9: because none of us are in a fire service area and to watch a fire truck come up to that house

[0:13:02] Voice 9: and not do anything to stand there and watch it was devastating so just a final message

[0:13:11] Voice 9: be prepared house fires are devastating no matter where they

[0:13:15] Trustee Patrick: are thank you all right so we're going

[0:13:20] Trustee Patrick: to be having a public comment period and i know there's a lot of people here so let's uh we do

[0:13:25] Trustee Patrick: want to hear from as many of you as we can your um this is your opportunity to speak and this is

[0:13:31] Trustee Patrick: your only opportunity to speak there is one application later in the agenda if the applicant

[0:13:35] Trustee Patrick: is amongst you the applicant can have a time to talk to us when we're considering their application

[0:13:42] Trustee Patrick: so we really do value what you have to say and while addressing us please address us here at

[0:13:54] Trustee Patrick: the room at the front not not others in the audience I do ask even no matter how passionate

[0:14:00] Trustee Patrick: you are about what the speaker is saying I really risk ask you not to to clap or make any sounds

[0:14:06] Trustee Patrick: because there could be someone else in the room that has an alternative opinion and we want this

[0:14:10] Trustee Patrick: to be a safe place for everyone to be able to speak. We want you to speak to issues not people

[0:14:17] Trustee Patrick: and I'm also going to have to really beg you today to be clear concise and respectful. I am going to

[0:14:24] Trustee Patrick: run a timer. I'll wave at you at a 30 second so you should wrap up. I know you have some interest

[0:14:32] Trustee Patrick: in the OCP project that's going on here. The engagement hasn't even begun yet. That's going

[0:14:36] Trustee Patrick: going to open up this summer, there will be lots of opportunity to be heard. So today is not the

[0:14:42] Trustee Patrick: last. Today is the beginning. So if you can't get everything you want to say today, there will be

[0:14:51] Trustee Patrick: lots more opportunities as well as we want to hear from you. You can email, write, and there'll be

[0:14:56] Trustee Patrick: lots of opportunities. So I'm going to also try to break up because I know there are people that

[0:15:03] Trustee Patrick: are from gambier that want to talk about the ocp directly i'm going to give you sort of a priority

[0:15:07] Trustee Patrick: in the lineup and then if you're off of uh gambier um uh you can um you know speak second to that

[0:15:15] Trustee Patrick: that's okay so uh we have a question about rules so

[0:15:19] Voice 7: you're here to speak to the application under

[0:15:22] Voice 7: the agenda nine not the gambier are you

[0:15:24] Voice 7: the applicant we are not yeah okay i'm here to

[0:15:27] Voice 7: oppose so i just okay where i fit in

[0:15:29] Trustee Patrick: i will add that thank you now is the time uh early on um

[0:15:33] Trustee Patrick: is the time. And I can welcome probably that conversation first in the OCP, because I don't

[0:15:39] Trustee Patrick: know how many people are here. If we want to break that up, the same rules apply to everyone.

[0:15:45] Trustee Patrick: But this is the time to hear from you if you're here to speak about the application, but you're

[0:15:49] Trustee Patrick: not the applicant. So does everyone understand the rules today? We're going to try to be as

[0:15:54] Trustee Patrick: thorough as we can. I do ask, how good is the microphone if they just stand up where they are?

[0:16:01] Trustee Patrick: think that's going to be able to pick it up or should they move to the if possible if they move

[0:16:05] Trustee Patrick: more to the room just behind the camera that's where the microphone excellent so if you stand

[0:16:10] Trustee Patrick: behind um uh the microphone that would be the easiest place to to go like i said we want to

[0:16:17] Trustee Patrick: hear from as many as people as we can yes sure like well then we won't hurt you okay well all

[0:16:27] Trustee Patrick: All right, so how many are here about the application on Thorne?

[0:16:33] Trustee Patrick: I'm dyslexic, so I can't say those very well.

[0:16:34] Trustee Patrick: How many are here to speak about the application?

[0:16:36] Voice 10: I'm the only one speaking.

[0:16:37] Voice 10: Nope, there are more.

[0:16:39] Trustee Patrick: Okay, thank you.

[0:16:40] Trustee Patrick: How many are here to talk about the Gambier OCP?

[0:16:46] Trustee Patrick: All right, yeah.

[0:16:48] Trustee Patrick: How many are here to talk about docs in general?

[0:16:53] Trustee Patrick: More.

[0:16:54] Trustee Patrick: That's what I thought.

[0:16:54] Trustee Patrick: Okay.

[0:16:57] Trustee Patrick: Yeah, so he's already said about two minutes.

[0:17:02] Trustee Patrick: I'm only going to allow about two minutes. We do have a full agenda before us today, so

[0:17:08] Trustee Patrick: I mean we would like to move on at some point, so we're going to start through the hierarchy

[0:17:14] Trustee Patrick: of the agenda. Yes, do you have a question?

[0:17:17] Voice 18: I'd like to suggest to you that some of us might not

[0:17:21] Voice 18: be familiar with the acronyms you use, OCP, LED, one thing another like that.

[0:17:27] Trustee Patrick: Thank you for your

[0:17:28] Voice 18: reminder thank you thank you

[0:17:34] Trustee Patrick: very much and i appreciate that yes official community plan ocp

[0:17:39] Trustee Patrick: lub is land use bylaws those are the regulations uh just i

[0:17:46] Voice 9: think we have something about something

[0:17:47] Voice 9: completely different so you can maybe talk after sure

[0:17:51] Trustee Patrick: yeah we'll try it yes okay i'm trying to get

[0:17:56] Trustee Patrick: get you all in. Like I said, patience, big room. Okay. I'm going to first ask for comments on the

[0:18:03] Trustee Patrick: Thornman Bee application. And I would appreciate it if we could just sort of line up at least to

[0:18:10] Trustee Patrick: the next speaker. You don't have to all be there, but if someone could be next and ready to go,

[0:18:13] Trustee Patrick: that I would appreciate it. So come on up, just stand behind that camera. Just behind, it's fine.

[0:18:20] Trustee Patrick: No, we don't need to see you. We just need to have you there.

[0:18:24] Trustee Patrick: I'm trying to get my thing to work and say

[0:18:27] Voice 7: your name. I will and do I also have 30 seconds?

[0:18:31] Voice 7: You

[0:18:31] Trustee Patrick: have two minutes. Everyone has two minutes. I'm going to leave you with 30 seconds. Oh I see.

[0:18:36] Trustee Patrick: Okay. Thank

[0:18:38] Voice 7: you. My name is Susan Dawson. I'm the daughter-in-law of the owner

[0:18:43] Voice 7: of lot 26. That's David and Rosanna Robitaille. They are the lot that's immediately adjacent to

[0:18:49] Voice 7: lot 25. I'm here to express the Robitaille's objections to the variance sought by the

[0:18:53] Voice 7: applicant and ask that the trust committee not accept staff's recommendation to approve it.

[0:18:58] Voice 7: David Robitaille is with me today, his grandson Sam Robitaille and his daughter Teresa Robitaille.

[0:19:06] Voice 7: In support you also have four letters written by various members of the Robitaille family.

[0:19:12] Voice 7: The fact that three generations of Robitailles are here today and four letters of opposition

[0:19:16] Voice 7: position were written. Both demonstrates our deep roots to the Vaucroft community and the

[0:19:24] Voice 7: significant negative impact the approval of the variance will have on our enjoyment of the

[0:19:28] Voice 7: property. I just want to highlight the four principal reasons in the staff report, three of

[0:19:35] Voice 7: the reasons in the staff report for the purpose of the setbacks. That's limiting the visual impact

[0:19:41] Voice 7: of development on the adjacent properties, establishing a consistent development pattern

[0:19:46] Voice 7: within the local area, protecting views, scenic areas, distinctive features that contribute to

[0:19:52] Voice 7: the overall visual quality and scenic value of the trust area. The information provided in the

[0:20:01] Voice 7: four letters clearly set out that the approval of the variance being sought today would undermine

[0:20:07] Voice 7: all of these objectives. On the visual impacts, I want to draw your attention to David and Rosanna's

[0:20:15] Voice 7: letter that has pictures um um embedded in the letter uh do you have that you all received that

[0:20:22] Voice 7: letter so

[0:20:23] Voice 7: on page two that shows the front of the robotai cabin which which looks out onto the

[0:20:30] Voice 7: boardwalk um that covered porch is the front access to the cabin it is it is where the front

[0:20:37] Voice 7: door is it is where it includes a porch where family members spend time right pages uh three

[0:20:43] Voice 7: Three and four show the side of the cabin that will be directly with the new building.

[0:20:49] Voice 7: Those are the windows that will be blocked.

[0:20:51] Voice 7: It's also the two sliding glass doors that lead to bedrooms.

[0:20:55] Voice 7: A utility shed is proposed to go in front of those bedrooms, impacting privacy and possible noise.

[0:21:01] Voice 7: Page seven shows the two people.

[0:21:03] Voice 7: That's where we roughly, and we were there last weekend, that's where it roughly shows where that utility shed would be.

[0:21:10] Voice 7: We have a concern that they will put a generator or something in there.

[0:21:15] Voice 7: People do that on Forman B to supplement their solar powers.

[0:21:22] Voice 7: Approval of the variance in the placement of the building facing west and within the rear lot setback is also not consistent with the development pattern.

[0:21:29] Voice 7: All the lots between lot 25 and 36 along that boardwalk face the boardwalk and are set back from that boardwalk.

[0:21:38] Voice 7: the proposed building set so close to the boardwalk and orientated with its side to the

[0:21:43] Voice 7: boardwalk would disrupt the uniformity and aesthetics of the area it's a deviation from the

[0:21:49] Voice 7: from the development plan and it's intrusive finally the boardwalk is a distinctive feature

[0:21:57] Voice 7: of the Bocoff community it's an essential shared space for residents and it's a central feature

[0:22:02] Voice 7: of north ormond be providing a cherished area for strolling biking visiting and community activities

[0:22:08] Voice 7: granting the variance was to fundamentally alter the function and ambience the space

[0:22:13] Voice 7: by creating an imposing barrier that disrupts the open open community atmosphere for these

[0:22:19] Voice 7: reasons we ask that you not grant the variance and we thank you for your time and consideration

[0:22:24] Voice 7: thank you so much

[0:22:25] Voice 7: all

[0:22:26] Trustee Patrick: right anyone else on the application for formandy uh

[0:22:31] Voice 16: yes we'd like to speak

[0:22:32] Voice 16: speak on behalf of the owner?

[0:22:35] Trustee Patrick: Are you representing the owner?

[0:22:37] Voice 16: Yes, yeah, they shouldn't be here today

[0:22:39] Voice 16: but could do work commitments.

[0:22:41] Trustee Patrick: Yeah, no, you're gonna be able to speak to us later

[0:22:43] Trustee Patrick: in the agenda when we consider your application.

[0:22:45] Trustee Patrick: So if you could wait, you'll have your own time

[0:22:47] Trustee Patrick: where we can talk to you.

[0:22:48] Trustee Patrick: So thank you.

[0:22:49] Trustee Patrick: Anyone else then?

[0:22:51] Trustee Patrick: All right, we're gonna move on to the OCP, I guess comments,

[0:22:55] Trustee Patrick: any official community plan.

[0:22:57] Trustee Patrick: Thank you very much.

[0:22:59] Trustee Patrick: And for those of you that live on Gambier

[0:23:01] Trustee Patrick: and have a direct interest uh you can if you can just like one at a time just get behind the next

[0:23:06] Trustee Patrick: person state your name and i am going to be very strict on on uh the two minutes going forward

[0:23:13] Trustee Patrick: if you wouldn't

[0:23:15] Voice 9: mind also stating the community you're from so we get a sense of what part of

[0:23:19] Voice 9: gambier that'd be great

[0:23:21] Voice 17: my name is don anderson uh lot 16 west bay um one of the realities of

[0:23:29] Voice 17: of life is that we own property.

[0:23:31] Voice 17: That's what we have right now.

[0:23:35] Voice 17: And my opinion, we need more public parks

[0:23:40] Voice 17: because we have more people in British Columbia.

[0:23:43] Voice 17: We need more public Marine parks, not less.

[0:23:50] Voice 17: We need more private access and we need more public access.

[0:23:57] Voice 17: access. We need more lots, not less. We need more housing, not less. We need more yacht clubs

[0:24:11] Voice 17: with longer docks and bigger docks. Thank you.

[0:24:16] Trustee Patrick: Thank you very much. Really appreciate you set

[0:24:20] Trustee Patrick: a good example for timing there. So thank you very much. Who's next? Please come on up.

[0:24:32] Voice 14: yes i'm i i hope i can follow that great example again um i i my name is phil aldrich um i

[0:24:39] Voice 14: represent the council bcr clubs i believe we forwarded a letter to you folks on march the

[0:24:45] Voice 14: 4th that kind of outlined our concerns from the recreational voting community's point of view

[0:24:50] Voice 14: i haven't heard any response or acknowledgement that we actually received that you received that

[0:24:56] Voice 14: letter which is a little concerning to us and I wanted to just preface this by suggesting that

[0:25:04] Voice 14: we're just regular folks and when we read through that deluge of paper that goes on and on and on

[0:25:12] Voice 14: about engagement process and dock regulations and the development permit area and so on it's

[0:25:21] Voice 14: It's very confusing, and it's most confusing when we try to understand how a more diverse set of points of view can be incorporated in the formulation of those guidelines.

[0:25:34] Voice 14: At present, as I have personally attended the APC meetings, a number of them, I think those folks are doing a great job at trying to respond to the guidelines that have been proposed.

[0:25:46] Voice 14: worked very hard at it but I but I can't help but think that the there is no there isn't diversity

[0:25:54] Voice 14: of perspective that's brought to the table in order to inform the decisions in a better way

[0:25:59] Voice 14: and so although we've brought up in our letter a number of issues that we think are problematic

[0:26:06] Voice 14: and we've made suggestions as how to to improve them we don't see the how the engagement process

[0:26:14] Voice 14: is going to be meaningful in the future as we move forward.

[0:26:19] Voice 14: We would hope that in fact,

[0:26:21] Voice 14: you could broaden the APC process

[0:26:24] Voice 14: so that we can include a more diverse set of perspectives

[0:26:27] Voice 14: with the expertise that many of us brings to the table.

[0:26:32] Voice 14: So far we're concerned that there is an engagement process

[0:26:37] Voice 14: that has taken place.

[0:26:38] Voice 14: At the very beginning,

[0:26:39] Voice 14: there was a consulting report that was put together

[0:26:42] Voice 14: that I'm sure you're aware of, back in 20, I think it was 2021, and the residents of the island were

[0:26:49] Voice 14: engaged in various ways. So it seems to us that the process has started, we're just looking for

[0:26:57] Voice 14: a way that this is going to be more meaningfully managed in a way that incorporates those kind of

[0:27:04] Voice 14: those perspectives okay did i make it within a few minutes

[0:27:11] Trustee Patrick: who else would like to speak please come on

[0:27:13] Trustee Patrick: hi

[0:27:15] Voice 22: andre ying long bay in gambier island and uh we have water access only property so i guess

[0:27:22] Voice 22: overall i can only imagine how hard your your jobs must be to try to manage all this i know kit you

[0:27:27] Voice 22: spoke to the fact of uh previous meetings and just the amount of passion everyone has of what's going

[0:27:33] Voice 22: And I think for a lot of us here, it's that lack of seemingly transparency of whether it be the government level, Islands Trust level, you know, historically what's happened in Pender Harbour, lack of consultation, everything that's happening that's drastically affecting our lifestyles and our lives for many who live on islands full time.

[0:27:54] Voice 22: And I think for me, I just look at the timing of this meeting.

[0:27:59] Voice 22: Who is available on a Tuesday, 10 a.m. in the morning, right?

[0:28:04] Voice 22: We talk about being as a society more inclusive, more engaging.

[0:28:07] Voice 22: Well, if you wanted a party and you want lots of people to come, you're not doing that 10 a.m. on a weekday, right?

[0:28:13] Voice 22: Most public hearings you would have them are in the evening when people aren't working, right?

[0:28:18] Voice 22: You've got working families, you've got retirees looking after elderly parents.

[0:28:22] Voice 22: this is probably the most inconvenient time you could have it unless you did at 7 a.m where you

[0:28:27] Voice 22: know traffic is even worse coming to the north shore but that just speaks i think to you know

[0:28:32] Voice 22: do you really want the engagement and and how long do you want it to take because you know for me

[0:28:39] Voice 22: it's about uh educating people empowering people with the knowledge but you also have to be taking

[0:28:45] Voice 22: that feedback to heart as well. You know, unfortunately, I see it as, you know,

[0:28:54] Voice 22: lack of transparency is a bit of a pattern here of, I think, government and an honest trust in

[0:29:01] Voice 22: terms of what's happened with Pender Harbor and everything else, and just the flawed science of

[0:29:05] Voice 22: not looking at local studies and looking at studies from Florida. I mean, what does Florida

[0:29:10] Voice 22: to have to do with with anything that we have here so everything's just flawed the way i see it i

[0:29:16] Voice 22: mean when you look at from what i understand gambier over 90 of private land is water access

[0:29:22] Voice 22: only and it scares me to think of some of the things that i've heard about that you're thinking

[0:29:27] Voice 22: even thinking of doing you know in a practical meaningful way um you know the shorelines are

[0:29:33] Voice 22: vastly different than what they are in florida compared to uh what we have at gambier and you

[0:29:39] Voice 22: you know, from what I understand too,

[0:29:41] Voice 22: why targets small private docks

[0:29:43] Voice 22: and not why not marinas

[0:29:44] Voice 22: seem to be exempt from everything.

[0:29:47] Voice 22: So in essence, all I would say is,

[0:29:49] Voice 22: you know, just slow down,

[0:29:51] Voice 22: hold evening or weekend hearings,

[0:29:52] Voice 22: you know, and really try to base things off science

[0:29:55] Voice 22: and not off secrecy.

[0:29:56] Voice 22: Thank you.

[0:30:00] Trustee Patrick: thank you no i really please ask i know um i that uh you're passionate and you could agree but

[0:30:06] Trustee Patrick: i just would really ask that you not uh react to speakers they're okay please

[0:30:13] Trustee Patrick: yes um

[0:30:14] Voice 9: i just want to have a quick clarification this is not a public hearing yeah this is the

[0:30:19] Voice 9: gambier island business meeting gambling local trust community business meeting we will have

[0:30:25] Voice 9: public hearings we will have public engagement and despite all the challenges we will do everything we

[0:30:31] Voice 9: can to make them more convenient for you um this this is not that scenario this is a business

[0:30:40] Voice 9: meeting we do it during the day uh specifically because we require the staffing support

[0:30:45] Voice 9: support and its access for the trustees, but please be assured, public engagement is coming

[0:30:54] Voice 9: and we will do what we can, weekends, evenings, if it has to be here, we'll be here as well.

[0:31:02] Voice 9: We do want to make this process clear for you, but just so you know, this is not a public hearing.

[0:31:10] Voice 9: Thank you. Okay, who's next?

[0:31:14] Voice 11: please thank

[0:31:16] Voice 27: you and good morning my name is uh steve van gallon i'm uh outstations director for

[0:31:21] Voice 27: the berard yacht club um i think it's uh a gentleman said that that it was uh important

[0:31:28] Voice 27: that we need more clubs more um i'd like to the committee to consider the uh the average pleasure

[0:31:35] Voice 27: boater is a major steward for the environment um we're out there picking up a plastic bag if we

[0:31:42] Voice 27: see it floating in the water. We have a great volunteer community. The word yacht club can be

[0:31:51] Voice 27: a little pretentious. I prefer boat club. I own a boat. And I think it's important to understand

[0:32:00] Voice 27: that, you know, we have a group, we have a community of 300 members that volunteer to go up

[0:32:08] Voice 27: to Eakins Point, there's an outstation there.

[0:32:11] Voice 27: We have deep water moorage and water access only.

[0:32:15] Voice 27: We had members go up there cleaning underbrush,

[0:32:19] Voice 27: taking out invasive species,

[0:32:21] Voice 27: making sure the facilities are clean and safe.

[0:32:25] Voice 27: And I believe yacht clubs are an important contributor

[0:32:31] Voice 27: to the environment and the stability of the environment.

[0:32:34] Voice 27: We have an opportunity to extend your reach through our membership, and I believe the advantage of aligning our philosophies is true, that there is strength in cooperation. Thank you.

[0:32:55] Voice 27: Thank

[0:32:56] Trustee Patrick: you very much.

[0:32:58] Voice 26: Anyone

[0:32:59] Trustee Patrick: else would like to speak, please?

[0:33:01] Trustee Patrick: please?

[0:33:03] Voice 26: I just have a question, seems to be missing from a lot of what's going on.

[0:33:07] Voice 26: Up

[0:33:08] Voice 9: in your name, please.

[0:33:08] Voice 26: Jim White, I'm the treasurer at Centre Bay Yacht Station.

[0:33:11] Voice 26: Thanks. When I look at the initiatives, to me, it's the dock initiatives that are the most

[0:33:18] Voice 26: scary for the yacht station, yacht clubs, and dock owners in general. But when I look at it,

[0:33:25] Voice 26: I see the guidelines, and they went through in Pender Harbour to some degree, and they're now

[0:33:31] Voice 26: seeming to come here and they seem to be very largely focused on protecting eel grass

[0:33:39] Voice 26: and initiating measures for docks to protect eel grass even when there's no eel grass for miles

[0:33:48] Voice 26: i'm just wondering and i don't know you're not the technical people who deal with this obviously so

[0:33:54] Voice 26: you may not have answers for me but that's a huge question in my mind and i think in a lot of

[0:33:58] Voice 26: people's minds who have docs of any kind and and what i'm looking for is some perspective on

[0:34:04] Voice 26: where we implement these guidelines that are meant to protect eelgrass where there just isn't

[0:34:10] Voice 26: next

[0:34:14] Voice 10: hi

[0:34:17] Voice 2: i'm bob barnes i'm representing thunderbird yacht club what i'm hearing is i'm

[0:34:22] Voice 2: lack of communication you mentioned about eelgrass 2014 i believe the island trust had a

[0:34:32] Voice 2: program where

[0:34:33] Voice 2: eelgrass is measured for the whole of

[0:34:35] Voice 2: Gambier Island. Nobody here knows

[0:34:37] Voice 2: about it. In fact, 90% of Gambier Island

[0:34:39] Voice 2: doesn't have eelgrass.

[0:34:41] Voice 2: We know that. Island Trust knows it.

[0:34:43] Voice 2: But none of you guys do.

[0:34:46] Voice 2: You had a little report

[0:34:47] Voice 2: out recently where

[0:34:49] Voice 2: we're all concerned about what happened at Pender.

[0:34:51] Voice 2: It scares the crap out of us.

[0:34:53] Voice 2: Except that was between the provincial

[0:34:55] Voice 2: governments and the Indian

[0:34:57] Voice 2: bands. Where we are,

[0:34:59] Voice 2: Now, that's not what's happening.

[0:35:01] Voice 2: This has been the island trust in the Inderband, totally different.

[0:35:04] Voice 2: The local government in Pender was completely cut out of everything.

[0:35:07] Trustee Patrick: Can you speak to us up here?

[0:35:09] Voice 2: Sorry, I was cut out of everything.

[0:35:11] Voice 2: Down here is totally different.

[0:35:13] Voice 2: I saw your report a few days ago, funny enough, with some relief,

[0:35:19] Voice 2: but I think 90% of the people here aren't aware of it,

[0:35:22] Voice 2: that you are actively doing it on behalf of the islanders of Gambia,

[0:35:27] Voice 2: and water access is important.

[0:35:31] Voice 2: But it comes back to communicating with us.

[0:35:33] Voice 2: We want to be part of the process, not after the fact.

[0:35:38] Voice 2: We want to be engaged with you.

[0:35:41] Voice 2: I think we need more information coming out

[0:35:42] Voice 2: from you to all of us, so we know what's going on,

[0:35:46] Voice 2: where you're at, where we're at with the old grass,

[0:35:48] Voice 2: with dock management, and so forth.

[0:35:52] Voice 2: And that's where we want to start the process is get

[0:35:55] Voice 2: us engaged, get us involved, so we know what's going on

[0:35:58] Voice 2: and we can actually provide input.

[0:36:00] Voice 2: Thank you.

[0:36:01] Voice 2: thank

[0:36:01] Voice 10: you very much

[0:36:01] Voice 10: my name

[0:36:07] Voice 4: is Doug Vincent

[0:36:08] Voice 4: I'm a member of Royal Van Yacht Club

[0:36:11] Voice 4: Centre Bay Yacht Station

[0:36:12] Voice 4: and I

[0:36:13] Voice 4: also own property

[0:36:14] Voice 4: in Tender Harbour

[0:36:15] Voice 4: and I have a dog

[0:36:18] Voice 4: I'm not sure

[0:36:19] Voice 4: is Gambier part of SWIA

[0:36:23] Voice 4: okay so it's not

[0:36:24] Voice 4: in the claim fence

[0:36:27] Voice 4: just so everybody

[0:36:28] Voice 4: knows

[0:36:30] Voice 4: there was a meeting on the 20th

[0:36:32] Voice 4: The province went through the renewed foundation agreement with SWIA.

[0:36:39] Voice 4: They have now backed away from the dock management plan.

[0:36:45] Voice 4: They are looking at other topics that they can have a shared agreement on.

[0:36:53] Voice 4: So I think that everybody here should pay attention to what's happening with the province and with SWIA.

[0:37:00] Voice 4: and there is another meeting on the 31st I believe at seven o'clock to discuss this foundation

[0:37:08] Voice 4: agreement and I think that this process should try to follow something similar to that they have

[0:37:15] Voice 4: agreed to go back and do more scientific research and try to come away with a better plan but at

[0:37:22] Voice 4: this point they are grandfathering all docks existing docks and boathouses and moving to a 25

[0:37:31] Voice 4: year lease so just pieces of information who

[0:37:39] Trustee Patrick: else would like to speak today

[0:37:46] Voice 24: hi i'm diane charette i'm from douglas bay gambier i represent a 53 lot strata that we have

[0:37:52] Voice 24: have. Our strategy is on the roads and docks and we have concerns. The transparency and

[0:37:58] Voice 24: communication that's been available has been better in the last few weeks than the last few

[0:38:02] Voice 24: months that I've tried to gather any information. I have concerns over the agenda materials that

[0:38:07] Voice 24: were sent out. In 2022, there was $16,000 spent on public engagement on a consultant and they

[0:38:13] Voice 24: came up with having OC pizza parties on the island. So that doesn't suit most of us who

[0:38:18] Voice 24: don't live there, and that information had to be forwarded. It's very difficult to find

[0:38:24] Voice 24: information, I find. I did submit a letter on behalf of our community. I did receive

[0:38:29] Voice 24: confirmation that it was received, whether that is going to be as correspondence or as something

[0:38:35] Voice 24: as a topic. I don't know how that process works. I guess just more streamline of the process was

[0:38:44] Voice 24: called for. So when they're talking about having Pender Harbour DMP be separate dock management

[0:38:48] Voice 24: management plan be separate. I noticed in the agenda materials, there was a call for a streamlined

[0:38:54] Voice 24: process on Gambier. So I don't know how we can have a streamlined process that encompasses

[0:38:59] Voice 24: different ecosystem areas and compare it to a provincial document that's been put in place.

[0:39:06] Voice 24: So those are my concerns. And I really hope that we can all work together more and have more

[0:39:11] Voice 24: transparency and have a better output to the local community. Having an OCP under review for over

[0:39:17] Voice 24: eight years, I believe, up to ten with absolutely no engagement. I currently reside full-time on

[0:39:22] Voice 24: Bowen Island and you cannot throw rock without running into an OCP statement or what have you.

[0:39:28] Voice 24: Obviously very different in terms of, I guess, population, but still I find it absolutely

[0:39:35] Voice 24: unacceptable that the OCP had to be brought to my attention by a random person. So thank you for your

[0:39:41] Voice 24: time thank you

[0:39:41] Voice 9: so much who

[0:39:44] Voice 11: else anyone

[0:39:46] Voice 9: else hi

[0:39:52] Voice 6: i'm jennifer route west vancouver yacht club also

[0:39:54] Voice 6: have a place on keats um i just quick comment i see when i was looking at the public engagement

[0:39:59] Voice 6: framework target review that you have on the website you've included as interested parties

[0:40:04] Voice 6: there two yacht clubs but west vancouver yacht club has not been included in there nor has

[0:40:10] Voice 6: thunderbird or the central bay yacht station if we could get them added to the list so we're

[0:40:14] Voice 6: included at the interested parties thanks thank

[0:40:16] Voice 9: you so much just for a point of information um

[0:40:22] Voice 9: if you want anything about any plans land use by loss that the islands trust has authority over

[0:40:29] Voice 9: the gambier there is a web on the island's trust website is a sign up um for updates through the

[0:40:39] Voice 9: islands trust update report so you can get everything that is uh available for gambier

[0:40:48] Voice 9: and it's the legislative communications through the islands trust which is your land planning

[0:40:54] Voice 9: if you want to get updates for myself i run through the gambier island organization email

[0:41:04] Voice 9: email, which has about 700 emails. It's kept very tight. If you want to get on that list,

[0:41:12] Voice 9: and then you get my reports in addition to the Islands Trust legislative required communications,

[0:41:19] Voice 9: then you can go to the gambiereisland.org, and there is a button at the bottom of the page

[0:41:25] Voice 9: to add your name, and then you get updates about the island, community updates,

[0:41:30] Voice 9: dates, cougar sightings, wolf sightings, those kind of things. But I also run through that

[0:41:35] Voice 9: for my own reports. And because the yacht clubs don't fit within our traditional landholder

[0:41:44] Voice 9: scenario, that could be the reason why they're getting lost in the communication. So I encourage

[0:41:50] Voice 9: all the yacht clubs to sign up for that gambierisland.org. And then you get all the

[0:41:57] Voice 9: community updates for the islands so

[0:41:59] Trustee Patrick: it's just a suggestion and also you can subscribe to the

[0:42:04] Trustee Patrick: islands trust website and specifically ask for gambier keats as well i really encourage you to

[0:42:09] Trustee Patrick: do that it works you'll get sent an email you'll get everything that's sent out so please uh please

[0:42:14] Trustee Patrick: subscribe greg where oh

[0:42:15] Trustee Patrick: and so if you go to our islands trust website there should there's a

[0:42:19] Trustee Patrick: subscription button somewhere i'm on the there's a i want to there you go there's a big green button

[0:42:24] Trustee Patrick: on the side that says i want to and then there's information there subscribe and you can choose

[0:42:29] Trustee Patrick: which which island you're interested in or if you want it all and there'll be a lot so choose wisely

[0:42:36] Trustee Patrick: how often is that updated because in the agenda material it says that the ocp project has been

[0:42:40] Voice 10: updated since well this

[0:42:42] Trustee Patrick: is a subscription service is the it's an email service it sends you

[0:42:46] Trustee Patrick: notifications whenever meetings or information is being sent out so it's a notification service

[0:42:55] Trustee Patrick: right you're don right yeah don

[0:42:59] Voice 17: anderson west bay lot 16 um i think there's an underlying fear here

[0:43:05] Voice 17: and i would like to address a possible solution for that fear um a while back i called up kate

[0:43:14] Voice 17: we had a very good conversation this is years ago kate and i asked i asked the question am i

[0:43:21] Voice 17: going to show up at my cabin someday and the first nations person is going to be in my cabin

[0:43:26] Voice 17: and she said no. Okay. As a Christian, I believe in the Bible, the prophetic voice.

[0:43:38] Voice 17: At the beginning, you mentioned the Spirit. So, I'm addressing that comment. I'm also addressing

[0:43:45] Voice 17: number two, the territorial acknowledgement. So, in the beginning, God created the heavens

[0:43:53] Voice 17: heavens, and the earth. God is the creator of everything. In Genesis 1.26, it says God gave

[0:44:02] Voice 17: them dominion. I

[0:44:05] Trustee Patrick: don't wish to interrupt you. I also was very clear in our acknowledgement that

[0:44:11] Trustee Patrick: this is a long-term relationship-building commitment that we are making. So I'd like

[0:44:23] Trustee Patrick: you to speak to to the issue in in particular today and you've already had a chance to speak

[0:44:30] Trustee Patrick: do you have anything new that you wish to share with us uh

[0:44:33] Voice 17: i don't know what your objection is

[0:44:38] Voice 10: yeah i'd like to be clear on that please i

[0:44:40] Voice 17: don't know what your objection is so

[0:44:42] Voice 10: we haven't heard

[0:44:42] Voice 10: the story i want

[0:44:44] Trustee Patrick: the issues to remain relevant i want room to remain comfortable and i want

[0:44:52] Trustee Patrick: us to talk about issues today, and that's what I'm really encouraging. You spoke very well

[0:44:59] Trustee Patrick: earlier. I understood and heard your message very clearly, and so I'm asking, did you have

[0:45:06] Trustee Patrick: anything new to add to that?

[0:45:08] Voice 17: I believe I have lots new. I

[0:45:14] Voice 10: think you're two minutes rough. Yeah,

[0:45:16] Trustee Patrick: I really would. You've had your chance to speak. Is there anyone else in the room that wishes to

[0:45:21] Trustee Patrick: speak today okay thank you yeah

[0:45:26] Voice 11: hi

[0:45:29] Voice 3: my name is frank foster and i am a resident from center bay

[0:45:36] Voice 3: part of west bay landing association and i am on the board for the west bay landing association

[0:45:43] Voice 3: my comments are from a personal perspective today and i wanted to thank the staff for

[0:45:50] Voice 3: the extensive work and documentation that is out there on their websites, it is a vast

[0:45:57] Voice 3: amount of information, and it's very difficult to get through it all because of the sheer

[0:46:02] Voice 3: volume that's there.

[0:46:03] Voice 3: Nonetheless, what I did find, speaking specifically on the topic of docs, and I'm referring to

[0:46:11] Voice 3: private docs, is that there is very little discussion supporting private docs and their

[0:46:18] Voice 3: benefits. And this is for existing dock owners now. And we're all very nervous about goalposts

[0:46:27] Voice 3: moving with new regulations and what impact it's going to have on our facilities. So,

[0:46:35] Voice 3: Kate, I appreciate you were commenting in your email that this was not about existing facilities,

[0:46:43] Voice 3: but I'm not seeing any wording saying that they're going to be exempted.

[0:46:46] Voice 3: I have found wording buried in the staff report from some time ago saying that if an existing doc has to be replaced, then it's going to have to comply with new regulations.

[0:46:59] Voice 3: And that is concerning for two reasons.

[0:47:03] Voice 3: One, people that have docs that are out of compliance are going to be faced with, do I go ahead and replace this doc, which may be a best management practice?

[0:47:13] Voice 3: this? Or because of those restrictions, shall I let this continue to run beyond its useful life

[0:47:19] Voice 3: and be a risk to the environment? So I would hope that we would see rooting that would not

[0:47:28] Voice 3: only exempt existing docks, but allow them to be replaced with well-maintained facilities

[0:47:34] Voice 3: that are in compliance or identical to what they had before. Okay. The other thing is the

[0:47:43] Voice 3: The design rules, one size does not fit all.

[0:47:47] Voice 3: There are people that have been involved in the design rule formulations that don't have enough local knowledge about the environments that we as water access only landowners are living in.

[0:48:04] Voice 3: And those items need to be a little better addressed.

[0:48:09] Voice 3: to be more specific about leeway in terms of specifics related to a particular site for a dock.

[0:48:18] Voice 3: The other thing is the benefits of the existing docks. With the public pressure coming on Gambier

[0:48:27] Voice 3: Island for more and more users, we have pressures on public transportation systems, seasonal ones

[0:48:34] Voice 3: for water taxis.

[0:48:36] Voice 3: They're often full when people try to book water taxis

[0:48:40] Voice 3: to get to the island.

[0:48:41] Voice 3: And we already hear about the public ferry service

[0:48:45] Voice 3: coming over to the island being a problem

[0:48:47] Voice 3: for existing owners on the island

[0:48:51] Voice 3: just trying to get off to get groceries and back.

[0:48:53] Voice 3: So the private docks help to alleviate that problem

[0:48:59] Voice 3: in the sense that they are taking people away

[0:49:04] Voice 3: from those services and leaving room for others.

[0:49:08] Voice 3: So it kind of, Kate, you mentioned balance.

[0:49:10] Voice 3: It helps to balance the overall infrastructure pressure

[0:49:14] Voice 3: that is on the island.

[0:49:16] Voice 3: So a little bit more support for private docks,

[0:49:20] Voice 3: I think, is worthwhile from a more global perspective

[0:49:24] Voice 3: on stopping pressure on public infrastructure

[0:49:29] Voice 3: for more roads, which is environmentally damaging.

[0:49:31] Voice 3: and also dealing with all these transportation issues.

[0:49:38] Trustee Patrick: Thank you. I think your time's up.

[0:49:40] Trustee Patrick: Thank you.

[0:49:43] Voice 9: Anyone else that wishes to speak? Thank you.

[0:49:48] Voice 23: Good morning. My name is Rod Hebert,

[0:49:51] Voice 23: and we have a little piece of paradise in Centre Bay, Lock 35,

[0:49:55] Voice 23: and we've owned it for around 30 years,

[0:49:59] Voice 23: and we've fulfilled our long-term commitment.

[0:50:02] Voice 23: We paid about $2,000 in taxes every year.

[0:50:07] Voice 23: We pay for the dock.

[0:50:09] Voice 23: And there's no sidewalks, no roads, no nothing.

[0:50:14] Voice 23: And it appears that the only thing we get is threats.

[0:50:20] Voice 23: You're going to take away our docks and stuff, and this is possible.

[0:50:24] Voice 23: And we've watched this process go along from Ladysmith and Pender Harbor and all that.

[0:50:30] Voice 23: And it seems to be disjointed. And I mean, there is a reason for a lot of fear. If we don't have our docks, we have no property. It's as simple as that.

[0:50:45] Voice 23: So I urge you to make sure that these private docks are protected

[0:50:50] Voice 23: and you kind of have some feeling for the cost that it's going to bring to the people there

[0:50:59] Voice 23: if you start changing a whole bunch of things and making a whole bunch of rules.

[0:51:03] Voice 23: We've got an 11 by 30 foot dock that is attached to the shore.

[0:51:09] Voice 23: There's nothing underneath or anything.

[0:51:11] Voice 23: It goes up and down with the tide.

[0:51:14] Voice 23: And it doesn't cause any problems. And I just urge you to take those things into consideration.

[0:51:23] Voice 23: And we have friends from Port Moody and other places. And this process has been brutal on

[0:51:30] Voice 23: people and it's taken so much of their time. And it's quite frustrating. Thank you.

[0:51:35] Voice 23: thank

[0:51:36] Trustee Patrick: you very much anyone else here i

[0:51:41] Voice 18: can speak from here um i may speak later on the

[0:51:46] Voice 18: docs particularly but one of the things that's been very challenging this morning is to hear

[0:51:54] Voice 18: people asking for transplants and when we get your bylaws sent out what we get is wording changes

[0:52:04] Voice 18: changes, but we don't get imperative violence. I believe that there is actually a degree

[0:52:11] Voice 18: of non-transparency exercised by the trust and by long association with it, so that we

[0:52:16] Voice 18: can get policies put forth. One of the heartening things that's happened over the last couple

[0:52:24] Voice 18: of weeks as we've tried to speak

[0:52:25] Voice 11: up, one

[0:52:27] Voice 18: of the heartening things that we've learned over

[0:52:30] Voice 18: the last couple of weeks is that there's a lot of concerns over how we're governed.

[0:52:35] Trustee Patrick: Can you speak to us up here?

[0:52:37] Voice 18: Yes, I'm sorry.

[0:52:38] Voice 18: I recall that rule.

[0:52:40] Voice 18: I'd like to talk to my friendly islanders,

[0:52:44] Voice 18: but I'll speak to you if I hope they can hear me.

[0:52:48] Voice 18: One of the things that's been quite heartening

[0:52:51] Voice 18: is that there's a lot of people with concern.

[0:52:53] Voice 18: But what I've also noticed is Gambier

[0:52:56] Voice 18: is a lot of different things to different people.

[0:52:59] Voice 18: And Kate Louise has identified

[0:53:01] Voice 18: that we're a bunch of little nodes,

[0:53:03] Voice 18: But we don't know each other well, we don't know what we need in different areas, and

[0:53:12] Voice 18: nor do you understand us well enough.

[0:53:16] Voice 18: We would like this process to slow so that we can connect with each other, that we can

[0:53:24] Voice 18: learn what we need so that we can come to you and let you know that, and how you represent

[0:53:32] Voice 18: our interests to government, rather than representing government issues to us.

[0:53:40] Voice 18: I believe that we have a unique opportunity with Canada, given the small population and the size.

[0:53:48] Voice 18: Very different than all the other islands' trusts. But allow us the opportunity.

[0:53:55] Voice 18: We'll find our own funding to do this process right.

[0:54:00] Voice 18: But don't push us for a year when you've been working on something for eight years.

[0:54:07] Voice 18: This relationship with the First Nations is important.

[0:54:10] Voice 18: We've already been involved.

[0:54:12] Voice 18: Six years ago when I renewed my lease, I had to pay the squamish band $2,000.

[0:54:18] Voice 18: For what?

[0:54:19] Voice 18: I phoned the government.

[0:54:20] Voice 18: I said, for what?

[0:54:22] Voice 18: Paul, if you want the lease, send them the money.

[0:54:25] Voice 18: This is a process that could be done better.

[0:54:29] Voice 18: would you please allow us the chance to do this right, not forced by policies, informed

[0:54:41] Voice 18: by contemporary sentence. Thank you. Thank you very much.

[0:54:50] Trustee Patrick: Okay, is there anyone else

[0:54:52] Voice 12: that wishes to speak?

[0:54:53] Voice 12: I live in Center Bay, I have for 45 years.

[0:54:56] Trustee Patrick: Thank you Paul.

[0:54:59] Trustee Patrick: anyone else that wishes to speak to us today

[0:55:10] Voice 28: question whether i should speak or not dennis nisbet from port moody my wife and i have a

[0:55:14] Voice 28: waterfront property with a dock for 30 years 20 year lease renewable when we moved in three years

[0:55:23] Voice 28: years ago we got sent from the port a 10-year term only going months to months license told to sign

[0:55:31] Voice 28: it or give them back our dock on our waterfront. We have a hundred owners and plus up Indian Arm

[0:55:37] Voice 28: that same license agreement is being sent to over 400 people and it clearly says 10-year specific

[0:55:46] Voice 28: term and at the end of it at months to months allowing the port authority to give you a 30-day

[0:55:54] Voice 28: notice, you will remove everything to their standards at our cost. When I was in meetings,

[0:56:02] Voice 28: it is all driven because of First Nations. So we need to know how to work with them. Absolutely.

[0:56:08] Voice 28: But when I've lived there, spent a fortune putting up a dock system, they want to take away my parcel

[0:56:15] Voice 28: A, which would then wash away my house. I have not been able to have a face-to-face meeting with

[0:56:20] Voice 28: anybody at the port or anybody from the First Nations, the threat is real that there can be

[0:56:28] Voice 28: some government input here that you just can't fight. We have an RDOS, which is Residential

[0:56:35] Voice 28: Dock Owner Society. We have been trying to get a face-to-face meeting with the port

[0:56:40] Voice 28: for two and a half years and crickets. They are forcing people. When I ask, can I negotiate or

[0:56:48] Voice 28: talk to somebody, I was told point blank, sign it, or we'll come and get your doc.

[0:56:54] Thank you.

[0:56:58] Trustee Patrick: All right. I really appreciate what we've heard today. That's our job to be here to

[0:57:04] Trustee Patrick: listen. And I do encourage you to pay attention, to subscribe, so that you can be informed of

[0:57:15] Trustee Patrick: our actions going forward here, how you can have more voice. Heard you loud and clear on

[0:57:21] Trustee Patrick: communications and transparency and um and i do encourage you to stay involved and uh

[0:57:29] Trustee Patrick: write email we do read it and so we do we do pay attention so i really appreciate all of you who

[0:57:37] Trustee Patrick: came today to to talk to us and uh and keep involved i'd like to move on with our agenda

[0:57:44] Trustee Patrick: because we have lots of business to to uh pay attention you're welcome to stay and hear us go

[0:57:50] Trustee Patrick: go on. So with that, thank you. So our business items, I'm going to move into item six. Oh,

[0:58:00] Trustee Patrick: I'm sorry. Oh, I'm so sorry. You had one other thing. I apologize. Thank you for reminding me.

[0:58:10] Voice 15: My name is Kurt Shepard. I'm from Keats Island. Earlier, you mentioned about a

[0:58:15] Voice 15: to take a but your budget being passed oh sorry about your budget being passed um people tell

[0:58:24] Voice 15: what the original district was six percent what does the island trust increase to the islanders

[0:58:31] Voice 15: 5

[0:58:32] Trustee Patrick: .9 i think or 5.8 one of those islands

[0:58:36] Voice 15: trust so basically the same idea roughly three dollars

[0:58:39] Voice 15: Oh, that's for $100,000?

[0:58:40] Voice 9: It would be a bit less because they have a lower proportion, percentage-wise, of your rural district taxing.

[0:58:52] Voice 15: So what increases that from a previous one? I don't have the numbers in front of me.

[0:58:56] Voice 15: It

[0:58:56] Voice 9: increases by a point.

[0:58:59] Voice 9: Yeah, sorry, I had all that open in front of me.

[0:59:01] Voice 9: It translates out to a couple of dollars per $100,000 for you.

[0:59:08] Voice 9: it's just each line item is different and also keats has different tax rates the gap here um

[0:59:15] Voice 9: because you have different functions for the region and

[0:59:17] Voice 15: so so that applies to all the islands

[0:59:20] Voice 15: yeah

[0:59:20] Voice 9: there's different rates for different islands but it's very it's all five five

[0:59:27] Voice 9: both island's trust and for the subject thank

[0:59:34] Trustee Patrick: you should be all there's a detailed press release

[0:59:37] Trustee Patrick: did you have a question regarding the budget oh

[0:59:40] Voice 14: it's about the agenda when exactly in the agenda

[0:59:43] Voice 14: are you going to be talking about dogs it's just not quite clear we're talking

[0:59:47] Trustee Patrick: about the official

[0:59:49] Trustee Patrick: community plan project um and that's going to be at item 10.1 on the agenda 10.1

[0:59:56] Voice 10: we'll be getting

[0:59:59] Trustee Patrick: I'm getting there soon.

[1:00:01] Trustee Patrick: Okay, trustees, let's carry on. We have before us the minutes from the January 28th minutes. Were there any additions or changes that need to be made to the minutes? Can we approve those to general consent?

[1:00:20] Trustee Patrick: We have a number of minutes from the Advisory Planning Commission, who have been diligently meeting and recording their meetings from January 22nd, February 5th, February 26th, and March 4th for receipt.

[1:00:36] Trustee Patrick: And then we had their recommendations for receipt as well, item 6.7 on the agenda.

[1:00:43] Trustee Patrick: so so uh

[1:00:47] Voice 9: chair where's the best place to speak about looking for the advisory planning commission

[1:00:53] Voice 9: that they are short two to three numbers it's well put under

[1:01:00] Trustee Patrick: new business okay if you're right

[1:01:03] Trustee Patrick: that's where it is

[1:01:04] Voice 9: make sure that

[1:01:05] Trustee Patrick: gets captured it is there thank you martha okay um i am 7.1

[1:01:12] Trustee Patrick: on the agenda is our what we call follow-up action list it's just a tracking are there any um things

[1:01:17] Trustee Patrick: that staff wish to address or point out from follow-up action list any questions from trustees

[1:01:24] Trustee Patrick: on the follow-up action list trustee stanford yeah

[1:01:27] Voice 9: i'm just wondering how far we're going with

[1:01:30] Voice 9: our um groundwater recharge mapping for the gambier local trust area um we were hoping to

[1:01:38] Voice 9: see that in october and i'm just wondering well is there a new eta for when we can see that project

[1:01:46] Voice 5: i'll follow up but the last that i heard there wasn't an eta there's staffing shortages and

[1:01:52] Voice 5: they haven't been able to hire so i'll follow up

[1:01:56] Voice 5: again after this meeting all

[1:02:00] Voice 10: right any other

[1:02:01] Voice 10: questions on the follow-up actually okay

[1:02:04] Trustee Patrick: we'll move on so this brings us to the application

[1:02:10] Trustee Patrick: piece on the variant the on Thornham Thornham and the

[1:02:16] Trustee Patrick: island we're going to get a staff report

[1:02:19] Trustee Patrick: first then I'll invite the applicant to add after that so I'm going to turn that's page 31 in the

[1:02:26] Trustee Patrick: agenda and I see trustee oh that was trustee sorry I always call staff trustees um that's

[1:02:35] Trustee Patrick: just a bad habit of my brooch bruce belcher is the staff member on on line so uh let's see if the

[1:02:44] Trustee Patrick: system's working over to you bruce thank

[1:02:47] Voice 13: you um yeah so this is a new development variance permit

[1:02:51] Voice 13: application for 570 vocroft road on thormanby island the proposed variance is to vary the

[1:02:59] Voice 13: minimum highway lot line and rear lot line setbacks. The required highway setback of 6.0

[1:03:07] Voice 13: meters would be varied to 2.0 meters and the required rear lot line setback of 7.5 meters

[1:03:15] Voice 13: would be varied to 1.5 meters. The applicant is proposing the variance due to the property being

[1:03:22] Voice 13: a corner lot with a limited building envelope. The application is following an Islands Trust

[1:03:29] Voice 13: preliminary plan review of the Sunshine Coast Regional District building permit application,

[1:03:36] Voice 13: and the proposed building location was determined to be non-conforming with the Gambier

[1:03:42] Voice 13: Associated Islands land use bylaw, at which point the applicant decided to apply for a variance to

[1:03:48] Voice 13: bring the proposal into compliance with the bylaw. The proposed dwelling has a height of 7.08 meters

[1:03:56] Voice 13: and a total floor area of 149.6 meters squared, which is equal to the maximum floor area ratio

[1:04:06] Voice 13: permitted on the property. Additional to the dwelling, there's an attached deck and utility

[1:04:12] Voice 13: shed proposed, and there is an existing cabin on the lot, which would need to be decommissioned

[1:04:19] Voice 13: and used as an accessory building following construction of a new dwelling. The lot coverage,

[1:04:24] Voice 13: including the proposed and existing structures would be equal to 24.96% or 186.8 meters squared,

[1:04:35] Voice 13: which is just below the maximum permitted lot coverage of 25%. And the draft permit was

[1:04:41] Voice 13: circulated on March 11th, and four letters of opposition have been received, all associated

[1:04:46] Voice 13: with the adjacent neighboring lot, and the letters of opposition identify issues with

[1:04:53] Voice 13: the location of the building in the rear lot line setback, impacting the view of the adjacent

[1:04:59] Voice 13: property, encroaching on the boardwalk, which has been identified as a distinctive feature

[1:05:05] Voice 13: in the neighborhood, and the different orientation of the building from other homes in the neighborhood.

[1:05:10] Voice 13: The letters also identified issues of privacy, height, and fire safety, although the proposed dwelling is compliant with the 1.5-meter interior lot line setback, and it is compliant with the maximum height, so those are not included as part of the variance.

[1:05:28] Voice 13: And staff did not complete a site visit to the property and therefore our recommendations were based on the available mapping information and imagery site photos provided by the applicant and the proposed plans and staff is recommending that the resolution on

[1:05:44] Voice 13: page one be supported as the rationale for the variance is reasonable because of the limited building envelope within the property. Thank you.

[1:05:53] Voice 13: Thank

[1:05:55] Trustee Patrick: you. At this time, I'd like to invite the representative of Noah Crangle, the applicant,

[1:06:02] Trustee Patrick: to come and you can add your information that you'd like to share with us about the application.

[1:06:07] Voice 16: Yes, this is Noah Crangle. My name is Norman Morrison. We're at the AG Custom Pre-Fab Homes.

[1:06:15] Voice 16: We're here to represent the owner who can't be here today because of her own work commitments.

[1:06:19] Voice 16: minutes. Sorry.

[1:06:21] Trustee Patrick: I just need you to speak

[1:06:23] Voice 16: up a bit. You do need

[1:06:25] Trustee Patrick: to speak to us, but you can speak up

[1:06:27] Trustee Patrick: so they can hear you.

[1:06:28] Voice 16: Sure. Yeah, I'll try to be a little louder, guys. Sure. Yeah, so we're here.

[1:06:33] Voice 16: I can start out by, you know, maybe addressing, you may know this already, but, you know, how,

[1:06:38] Voice 16: why we're here to get to various. So we do a lot of work on all the islands. We deal with

[1:06:46] Voice 16: Island's Trust permits all the time in different parts of the Zaleshi everywhere. We have a long

[1:06:54] Voice 16: history of working with you guys. In this particular case, our design department,

[1:07:00] Voice 16: as part of their upfront design process, they will contact the Island's Trust with direct information

[1:07:12] Voice 16: questions about placement etc like that and in this case this is this is what's what what has

[1:07:17] Voice 16: did occur uh we did that process at the very beginning and we were told a certain thing

[1:07:22] Voice 16: as far as the setback and and then so we proceeded based on that and designed the home to suit

[1:07:29] Voice 16: the the lot based on the setbacks that we were provided with and as you as you may know then

[1:07:36] Voice 16: then that was all good until we actually got to applying for the permit and then it came to our

[1:07:42] Voice 16: attention that there was some conflicting information that it did not it did not um

[1:07:47] Voice 16: it did not conform so that's i guess the reason why we're here it's is um to for the owners who

[1:07:56] Voice 16: have spent tens of thousands of dollars and of design and time and consultants to get to that

[1:08:01] Voice 16: permitting stage um they just they decided that because it's their choice of course to

[1:08:07] Voice 16: to come go to the variance board and and you know and request exactly that so that's why we're here

[1:08:17] Voice 16: um the the variance that we're looking for as you may know is on the ball crop roadside

[1:08:24] Voice 16: um not the back side which we are conforming to and and uh did you want to

[1:08:29] Voice 25: speak about that okay

[1:08:30] Voice 25: i'll let noah speak

[1:08:31] Voice 25: to that i'm noah krangel i'm the project manager of the g and also the agent

[1:08:36] Voice 25: for the permit um yeah so just in regards to the opposition uh points that were made um the main

[1:08:43] Voice 25: setback line that is in between these two properties that we see as bruce had mentioned uh

[1:08:50] Voice 25: it's in conformance and uh the heights as well of the structure that's being proposed is not

[1:08:56] Voice 25: within concerns of this variance it's mostly just regarding the front setback onto the

[1:09:00] Voice 25: the Volcroff Road there.

[1:09:02] Voice 25: And the orientation which was concerned was it's designed in a way

[1:09:07] Voice 25: to maintain harmony with the existing cabin that's been there

[1:09:10] Voice 25: for generations just to make sure that it's not closing off

[1:09:14] Voice 25: towards that house and you can make sure the property is still being used

[1:09:17] Voice 25: by both houses.

[1:09:19] Voice 25: And we're more than willing to act within good faith to adjust anything

[1:09:24] Voice 25: that needs to be done if there's any concerns with noise-producing equipment

[1:09:28] Voice 25: been like generators or anything that could be a cause to undo uh from disturbance to any neighbors

[1:09:36] Voice 25: around the properties all

[1:09:38] Trustee Patrick: right all i'm going to do now is uh open the floor for the trustees to

[1:09:42] Trustee Patrick: ask questions to either the applicant or staff so do you have any questions sure yeah

[1:09:49] Voice 12: i've got

[1:09:50] Voice 12: questions for staff um the choice actually um member of the public that was commenting

[1:09:59] Voice 12: in opposition to this uh mentioned a boardwalk and looking at page 33 in the diagram there

[1:10:07] Voice 12: one of the this is a question for the staff one of the uh or the member of the public that is

[1:10:16] Voice 12: opposing this application, had some comments that were, as I understood them, principally

[1:10:24] Voice 12: objections to the aesthetic changes, restricted sight lines, basically a material change to

[1:10:33] Voice 12: quality of the experience, I think, for people who, as I understood it, walk along a boardwalk.

[1:10:40] Voice 12: uh two questions when i look at the diagram on page 33 of the agenda uh perhaps uh i'm not

[1:10:50] Voice 12: entirely clear where the boardwalk is located and related to that i'd like to the staff is

[1:10:57] Voice 12: supporting this application the issue that's been brought before us is this aesthetic design

[1:11:04] Voice 12: uh quality of experience point which is not even trivial because of course that's why we all have

[1:11:11] Voice 12: places on the islands um but it's a big part of it could staff please uh point out where that

[1:11:18] Voice 12: boardwalk is and uh address the point about the effect on the aesthetics of the area uh if this

[1:11:26] Voice 12: is granted so

[1:11:28] Voice 13: um the boardwalk if you look at the figure two site plan there's the rear lot line

[1:11:34] Voice 13: identified in the top left corner there the boardwalk would be adjacent uh just to the left

[1:11:41] Voice 13: there i believe uh it's it goes along those the rear lot lines of the properties um which i

[1:11:48] Voice 13: believe is a common property or it's uh it's i guess used as a walkway or park space um

[1:11:58] Voice 13: so yeah it would be that that is considered the rear lot line which is a 7.5 meter

[1:12:03] Voice 13: requirement which the the proposal would be to vary that to reduce it to I believe it would be

[1:12:12] Voice 13: 1.5 meters so I I can't speak to the really to the existing neighborhood how the how everything's

[1:12:26] Voice 13: conformed because I haven't been to the site and I haven't seen it but in terms of the neighborhood

[1:12:34] Voice 13: consistency. It appears that the existing buildings are also in compliance with the

[1:12:43] Voice 13: rear lot line, and this one is moved over more so. And as you can see on the site plan,

[1:12:51] Voice 13: it shows where the setback is. I believe it's that the blue line is where the setback is

[1:13:01] Voice 13: required and because it's a corner lot um the the specific zoning requires a six meter setback from

[1:13:09] Voice 13: all highway lines so um it limits the uh building envelope and that's why they've or that's why the

[1:13:22] Voice 13: recommendation was made um as far as the uh existing conditions i don't know if i can speak

[1:13:28] Voice 13: to that please

[1:13:31] Voice 12: do the

[1:13:34] Voice 13: existing conditions of the please

[1:13:36] Voice 12: please you know if you got more to add

[1:13:38] Voice 12: please please add it

[1:13:40] Voice 13: so yeah like i've i haven't been to the site and i um uh our recommendation

[1:13:46] Voice 13: was made prior to receiving notification um and obviously following notification those need to be

[1:13:53] Voice 13: considered in the decision so uh that's i think all i can say all

[1:14:04] Voice 10: right let's go ahead and try

[1:14:06] Voice 10: to stanford um

[1:14:10] Voice 9: first uh uh question to the representatives for the

[1:14:14] Voice 9: applicant um this is a

[1:14:17] Voice 9: a very tight plan on a very small challenging piece of property it's not unheard of but

[1:14:24] Voice 9: everything is being planned to the extreme of what is possible in a way is was there

[1:14:31] Voice 9: consideration for a different location for the new build and the other question i have

[1:14:40] Voice 9: was the use of the utility um structure will that be used for a generator um

[1:14:46] Voice 16: no i can speak

[1:14:47] Voice 9: well

[1:14:48] Voice 16: again back to the beginning what i mentioned that this this was designed

[1:14:53] Voice 16: with you know with the with what the owner was hoping for for their family's usage uh with

[1:15:00] Voice 16: information that we received from diana's trust as far as where we could fit it in

[1:15:04] Voice 16: So it was pretty, like all of our designs, owner-driven.

[1:15:09] Voice 16: So our job is to fit what they want within the rulebook.

[1:15:14] Voice 16: And that's what our goal was as we were designing for it.

[1:15:18] Voice 16: So that's why they ended up where they are.

[1:15:21] Voice 16: And they got the space and the rooms that they were hoping for.

[1:15:25] Voice 16: As far as the utility shack, there was no plan to put a generator

[1:15:29] Voice 16: in that they were planning on putting a solar power system.

[1:15:33] Voice 16: But like Noah mentioned earlier, we're happy to address that with the owners

[1:15:37] Voice 16: because we understand that that would be not a great thing

[1:15:43] Voice 16: to have a generator running on the property line.

[1:15:46] Voice 16: So if that was going to be part of this power system,

[1:15:50] Voice 16: we would definitely come up with something that is good for all parties

[1:15:56] Voice 16: and not causing any undue noise.

[1:16:00] Voice 25: And if I may add to, just to readdress what I said, the orientation of the proposed structure,

[1:16:06] Voice 25: its purpose and its layout is to maintain harmony with the existing cabin that's already

[1:16:11] Voice 25: been built there. The purpose of this new development is for multi-generations of families

[1:16:17] Voice 25: to live there and share the space, so that is why it's orientated in such a way.

[1:16:21] Voice 25: A

[1:16:24] Voice 9: question for staff, for the planner. When looking at the plan for this, was there any

[1:16:33] Voice 9: review of other properties along that same rear lot line that have rear lot line exceptions?

[1:16:45] Voice 9: I have been along that boardwalk. I know some houses seem closer to the boardwalk than others.

[1:16:52] Voice 9: I also remember in previous terms that we have allowed for setback relaxation for some of these homes.

[1:17:03] Voice 9: Was there any consideration of where the location of other homes were along that rear lot line?

[1:17:13] Voice 13: I have not reviewed that information for this application or the properties also on Vaucroft.

[1:17:21] Voice 13: So I would have to look at that.

[1:17:27] Voice 12: Is that a question for staff?

[1:17:29] Voice 10: Yes,

[1:17:30] Voice 12: I've got another question for you.

[1:17:33] Voice 12: As you've been working on this application,

[1:17:36] Voice 12: have you received any other correspondence or objections from the community

[1:17:41] Voice 12: or members of the community to the application?

[1:17:44] Voice 12: What I'm trying to do here is get a measure to the extent that it's possible,

[1:17:49] Voice 12: a measure of the community reaction based on your experience as a planner.

[1:17:55] Voice 12: We've heard one representative of a family that objects to the development.

[1:18:01] Voice 12: Have you received other correspondence or emails or phone calls from other Normandy residents who have objections to this?

[1:18:09] Voice 12: Does that happen?

[1:18:11] Voice 13: So all the correspondence was related or came from the adjacent property, the neighboring property.

[1:18:19] Voice 13: It was all from different, I believe, members of the family that had expressed their concerns

[1:18:25] Voice 13: and they had written different letters.

[1:18:28] Voice 13: But no, we've not received any concerns or objection from other property owners.

[1:18:37] Trustee Patrick: Thank you.

[1:18:38] Trustee Patrick: I have a question though, can I?

[1:18:42] Trustee Patrick: So my understanding is the accessory building is going to have a kitchen removed, but I've

[1:18:47] Trustee Patrick: also heard the applicant referred to multi-generational living.

[1:18:50] Trustee Patrick: So a cottage or two dwellings is not allowed under the local regulations?

[1:18:57] Voice 13: That's right. Yeah. It would need to comply as an accessory building.

[1:19:02] Voice 13: So it wouldn't be allowed to be used as a dwelling on the property.

[1:19:06] Trustee Patrick: I guess that's my question to the applicant. Was that expected to be used as a dwelling?

[1:19:11] Trustee Patrick: As per the rule, it's going to be decommissioned

[1:19:14] Voice 16: when the new home is in place.

[1:19:19] Voice 16: We're planning to keep it. We don't want to demolish it.

[1:19:22] Voice 18: but it's it will be a decommissioned building uh

[1:19:27] Voice 9: professor stanford um also in reference this

[1:19:31] Voice 9: is to the planner uh also in reference to the second uh the cottage the current cottage how do

[1:19:39] Voice 9: we uh ensure that decommissioning is uh occurring follow-up visit so at

[1:19:48] Voice 13: the time that the uh that we

[1:19:51] Voice 13: we complete our preliminary plan review for the building permits.

[1:19:55] Voice 13: So if this was approved,

[1:19:57] Voice 13: then we would then complete a preliminary plan review.

[1:20:00] Voice 13: And as condition of a final occupancy,

[1:20:04] Voice 13: we would include that the existing dwelling would need to be decommissioned

[1:20:11] Voice 13: to meet the definition of an accessory building,

[1:20:13] Voice 13: which is then provided to the Sunshine Coast Regional District.

[1:20:17] Voice 13: and their building inspection would be ensuring

[1:20:20] Voice 13: that all those conditions are met

[1:20:22] Voice 13: prior to issuing their final occupancy.

[1:20:30] Voice 9: I have a further question,

[1:20:32] Voice 9: and this is sort of more to the trust as a whole,

[1:20:36] Voice 9: is site visits used to be quite frequent

[1:20:41] Voice 9: and they have been an important part of our decision-making

[1:20:47] Voice 9: to understand that this fairly challenging lot

[1:20:52] Voice 9: has not had a site visit by a planner um i'm just wondering has there been a change

[1:20:58] Voice 9: in planning process that we don't seem to be doing as much site visits um it seems to be

[1:21:06] Voice 9: coming out of covid that that seemed to be the new way of working so i'm not sure if anyone

[1:21:12] Voice 9: can answer that but i've noticed that we're not doing as many uh especially to these people are

[1:21:19] Voice 9: hard to access islands so it's more of a comment there's been any policy change no policy change

[1:21:31] Voice 9: i'm happy to follow up on that thanks

[1:21:38] Trustee Patrick: all right trustees how would you like to receive

[1:21:46] Voice 10: um i

[1:21:48] Voice 12: guys the uh i'm finding that there's a certain amount of difficulty here which is

[1:21:55] Voice 12: uh trustee stanford's point you know and i was kind of alluding to it before was that

[1:22:02] Voice 12: uh it would be uh better for the decision making process if we had an assessment

[1:22:11] Voice 12: uh from staff of the issues that we heard about essentially what i'm hearing is

[1:22:18] Voice 12: aesthetic issues but as i said before those are not trivial uh and

[1:22:24] Voice 12: And staff not having been there to just simply survey for that purpose is less optimal.

[1:22:35] Voice 12: And I'm wondering, but at the same time, we basically have one family that's objecting to it.

[1:22:43] Voice 12: That's going to affect their experience.

[1:22:44] Voice 12: We haven't heard anything from the rest of the community.

[1:22:46] Voice 12: and i'm also sensitive to the reality that uh the people who are hoping to build this

[1:22:55] Voice 12: new dwelling have put a lot of time and effort into it they spent money uh and uh they've received

[1:23:03] Voice 12: basically staff's approval of this and so i don't want to uh unduly create problems for them

[1:23:10] Voice 12: I'm just wondering if it's feasible for us to ask staff to do that site visit to confirm its original assessment, whether it's reasonable, which is to say that the aesthetic change isn't going to be immaterial.

[1:23:29] Voice 12: and if that's the case then we might be able to prove this application it's resolution without

[1:23:34] Voice 12: meeting so the homeowners or the the applicants don't have to wait till next june before they

[1:23:41] Voice 12: hear from us one way or the other so that's my tentative suggestion but i'd like to hear the

[1:23:47] Voice 12: other trustees what they think about that

[1:23:50] Voice 9: stanford um i recognize the challenges here i also recognize

[1:23:55] Voice 9: recognize that kind of the reason they're here in the first place is some kind of miscommunication

[1:24:02] Voice 9: or misinterpretation by potentially planning staff on how this setback was created in the

[1:24:12] Voice 9: first place. What was the original build plan that was okayed? Do I have this interpretation

[1:24:20] Voice 9: prediction correct? Because that's how I read it.

[1:24:23] Voice 16: If you'd like to speak to that, come on over.

[1:24:25] Voice 9: I think I'll get the planners to respond.

[1:24:30] Voice 9: Do you want to give some clarification to that?

[1:24:36] Voice 9: Planner Belcher.

[1:24:37] Voice 9: Planner Belcher.

[1:24:40] Voice 13: So I believe how it started was the applicant requested information on the

[1:24:47] Voice 13: lot line setbacks related to um the the bylaw and the and it wasn't through an application so we

[1:24:57] Voice 13: weren't actually seeing i don't know if or maybe the plans were seen it wasn't through i wasn't

[1:25:03] Voice 13: involved with it but uh i believe they were provided the um lot line definitions but they

[1:25:09] Voice 13: the the existing the zoning wasn't identified which uh the specific zoning had different lot

[1:25:16] Voice 13: line requirements for highways then the definitions laid out and that's where the

[1:25:23] Voice 13: miscommunication was from. And

[1:25:26] Voice 16: to be clear we were very specific about this specific plot

[1:25:29] Voice 16: when we when we asked these questions originally lines with the address. Oh yeah

[1:25:34] Voice 9: I'd like to

[1:25:35] Voice 9: keep speaking so given this scenario and I keep going back to the size and the shape of the lot

[1:25:42] Voice 9: i think given that the actual building envelope is within our um within our bylaws um i'm not sure

[1:25:55] Voice 9: even with any more information there's going to be a lot of movement um within this this particular

[1:26:04] Voice 9: lot so i'm not sure the benefit in the end of delay uh that's

[1:26:10] Voice 10: why i asked the question

[1:26:11] Voice 10: what i'm sure for myself yeah

[1:26:13] Voice 9: so um this this is a more difficult one but um i'm willing to

[1:26:19] Voice 9: uh put the recommendation i'm willing to use the recommendation uh unless trustee patrick has any

[1:26:27] Voice 9: further no i have no further questions so proceed i move that the gambier on local trust committee

[1:26:33] Voice 9: committee approve issuance of PLPBP 2025-0019?

[1:26:39] Voice 9: Is there a second?

[1:26:40] Voice 12: I'll second that.

[1:26:41] Voice 9: Seconded, any discussion?

[1:26:45] Voice 9: This is a tough one.

[1:26:48] Voice 9: I know that building envelopes all over this part

[1:26:53] Voice 9: of the farm to me are tight.

[1:26:55] Voice 9: I'm looking at the other development on small lots.

[1:27:01] Voice 9: This is the reality for this community. I do know that there are other property buildings that are within close setbacks with the road right-of-ways, just given how small these lots are.

[1:27:19] Voice 9: are modern day planning just does not fit on farming me and with other rural violence so

[1:27:29] Voice 9: i'm going to vote on babe in favor of this but i i'm quite reluctant it's it's um it's a difficult

[1:27:37] Voice 9: position to be this way yeah

[1:27:41] Voice 12: my own view on this is that it's uh it's not as straightforward as

[1:27:44] Voice 12: it's convenient and i'd like it to be but uh as i mentioned before i do take seriously the um

[1:27:53] Voice 12: potential effect any new development can have on one of our islands here in terms of you know the

[1:28:00] Voice 12: larger environmental effect i don't mean environmental degradation i actually mean

[1:28:04] Voice 12: with respect to the quality of life of the other residents um that's why i was suggesting before

[1:28:11] Voice 12: maybe have an abundance of caution stuff might don't have a look but you know i've heard trustee

[1:28:16] Voice 12: Stanford on this. You know, as I've been mulling over this point, the reality is we've only heard

[1:28:21] Voice 12: from one property, so to speak, that's objecting to it. The rest of the community isn't showing

[1:28:31] Voice 12: any kind of objection to it. I can understand why the neighbors who are going to have their

[1:28:38] Voice 12: their sight lines changed, may not be that happy about it,

[1:28:43] Voice 12: but the reality is property owners have a right to make use of their property

[1:28:49] Voice 12: to the extent that it doesn't unduly affect other people.

[1:28:53] Voice 12: I'm not hearing really enough that would justify refusing the application

[1:29:00] Voice 12: in that I'm not hearing enough that suggests that there is going to be

[1:29:07] Voice 12: some kind of effect to the larger community in terms of the aesthetics and sight lines that

[1:29:13] Voice 12: sort of thing so for that reason i'll be going in favor of this my

[1:29:19] Trustee Patrick: only comment is uh this is

[1:29:21] Trustee Patrick: a challenge we do have on many of the islands as we have uh as like trustee stanford referred to it

[1:29:27] Trustee Patrick: as we kind of hold urban style regulations that were used back when cottages were all that were

[1:29:34] Trustee Patrick: were built were small cottages. Now that houses are getting larger, those schools weren't as

[1:29:41] Trustee Patrick: protective as they could have been because people weren't able to build larger things because of the

[1:29:46] Trustee Patrick: larger footprints. That's work to be done and things for all communities on small islands to be

[1:29:51] Trustee Patrick: aware of. So my biggest concern is, I guess, what will be an accessory.

[1:30:00] Trustee Patrick: dwelling will access not an accessory dwelling and accessory building will it will it be an

[1:30:08] Trustee Patrick: accessory building and that's going to have to be follow-up from staff to follow that project

[1:30:14] Trustee Patrick: along and so with that is there any further discussion I will call the vote then we're

[1:30:24] Trustee Patrick: voting on uh approving issuance of this uh development permit uh all those in favor

[1:30:31] Trustee Patrick: raise your hands that carries so thank you for coming today thank you um and um

[1:30:41] Trustee Patrick: with that we will move on to the next item so um

[1:30:50] Trustee Patrick: so we're going to move on to item 10.1 which is on page 50 of your agenda package if you're

[1:30:56] Trustee Patrick: following along and this is on the uh major project

[1:31:00] Voice 9: people

[1:31:05] Trustee Patrick: a moment to leave the room there

[1:31:09] Trustee Patrick: um we're going to be turning over to uh island planner uh supinex we just have some uh some

[1:31:15] Trustee Patrick: noise in the room as people leave if you could just wait one minute sure

[1:31:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): thank you is my audio

[1:31:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay. Yes. All

[1:31:25] Voice 10: right.

[1:31:37] Trustee Patrick: If you're exiting the room, I've asked if you can just keep your

[1:31:39] Trustee Patrick: conversations outside the room, that would be appreciated. So that we can carry on here.

[1:31:46] Trustee Patrick: Right over to planners.

[1:31:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): Good morning, trustees, and welcome Chair Patrick to this local

[1:31:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): Trust Committee. I'm presenting this supplemental report on your major project, the official

[1:31:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): community plan and land use bylaw review. This report specifically focuses on the draft shoreline

[1:32:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): development permit area guidelines for LTC review, as well as your advisory planning commission

[1:32:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendations and next steps for potential public engagement. I'm happy to do a quick summary

[1:32:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): of this report or if the LTC wishes to have staff address any of the comments that were made during

[1:32:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): the public comment section. I can also leave space and time for that as well as there were

[1:32:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): several corrections that could be made. So the key items for your discussion today are looking at

[1:32:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): and possibly endorsing the draft shoreline DPA language. Draft being the operative word to guide

[1:32:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): environmentally responsible shoreline development on Gambier Island as part of our engagement with

[1:32:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): the Squamish First Nation. This was a key tool for guiding future development that was recommended,

[1:33:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): re-engaging with the nation with the draft language to give the local trust committee

[1:33:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): confidence that the language does represent and reflect the original recommendations of the nation,

[1:33:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): preparing a refined draft development permit area document with the APC and Squamish Nation input

[1:33:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): for your future consideration and looking at a draft public engagement work plan this is based

[1:33:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): on your advisory planning commission's recommendations so that at your May meeting

[1:33:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): you have a work plan that you could actually potentially endorse and I'm also recommending

[1:33:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommending endorsement of an updated project charter and recommendations regarding some

[1:33:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): vacancies for your advisory planning commission and potentially filling those vacancies as part

[1:33:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the next step of work. So this report is looking at these objectives to ensure we maintain

[1:33:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): some momentum on this important project. And while incorporating community and First Nations

[1:33:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): perspectives into the deliverables, I look forward to your discussion and any questions that you have.

[1:34:06] Trustee Patrick: If you could address some of what we heard during the public comment, that would be appreciated.

[1:34:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): So the comment regarding eelgrass, I just want to clarify for members of the public and anyone watching the recording,

[1:34:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): we do have eelgrass mapping for the islands.

[1:34:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): Trust it is several years out of date in terms of we don't have annual mapping resources for eelgrass.

[1:34:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): But at the time that the mapping was conducted, 2014, there are significant portions of Gambier Island in the southern reaches that do have patchy or continuous or fringe presence of eelgrass, which suggests that this was also potentially further, that there are further areas of the shoreline that could be reestablished with eelgrass.

[1:34:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): There are specific targeted sites that were noted at that point in the study as well that were excellent candidates for reestablishment based on the site characteristics.

[1:35:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): So it's important to recognize that this project and the official community plan is grounded in recommendations from Squamish Nation, is grounded in best planning and science for official community plans and land use bylaws in a rural context across the trust.

[1:35:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): As well, this project is not focused on removing existing docks. There's absolutely no scope in this project to address docks in that way.

[1:35:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is for looking at new alterations, new construction to the landscape and to the marine areas that could potentially be subject to regulations that reflect the issues that we're addressing today in 2025, moving forward, and the engagement summary with Squamish that was conducted last year.

[1:35:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): and so there was a mention around us using studies based on the east coast of the united

[1:36:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): states and that is not the case at all so any mention of staff resorting to studies conducted

[1:36:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): in florida for shoreline protection is not accurate there's any other questions i'd be

[1:36:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): happy to address them specifically thank

[1:36:25] Voice 10: you for the trustees questions for staff

[1:36:28] Voice 10: um i

[1:36:33] Voice 9: thank you very much juana um i think you clarified some issues i think um you know there's

[1:36:43] Voice 9: a lot of particular comments that i could make um within the specific recommendations of the

[1:36:52] Voice 9: draft language but i almost think it's better that as we talk about it we talk about it more

[1:36:57] Voice 9: and a whole holistic one um one of the the things that i'm hearing that i'm hoping can go along with

[1:37:06] Voice 9: this this draft guidelines is further resources for residents to be able to to look at including

[1:37:19] Voice 9: how eelgrass is determined how environmental shoreline features are determined as well as

[1:37:28] Voice 9: Maybe reference to research that is done that is more appropriate to this area.

[1:37:37] Voice 9: I don't want to get into the science versus scientist scenario that we had with Boyer Island that went on for a couple of years over whether a stream was riparian area or not.

[1:37:54] Voice 9: But I do think it's important that we base our recommendations.

[1:37:59] Voice 9: on something that community does recognize um and the other sort of general

[1:38:07] Voice 9: thought as i'm looking at this is more clear language around like i think you were actually

[1:38:16] Voice 9: very clear in the in the beginning of the the draft language but again you really have to

[1:38:23] Voice 9: emphasize the role that an official community plan and land use bylaws play how it differs from other

[1:38:32] Voice 9: processes from other authorities including court authorities including provincial government

[1:38:40] Voice 9: negotiations with first nations it keeps coming back to that that this is being conflated with

[1:38:49] Voice 9: with those processes and they are very different and I want to emphasize in our official community

[1:38:56] Voice 9: plan recognize that Docs are critical access points to the water access only aspects of the

[1:39:06] Voice 9: Amber Island and that is not going away in our official community plan which is the planning

[1:39:14] Voice 9: planning document and our visioning for our island. I don't know if there's anything additional

[1:39:23] Voice 9: that planners can recommend to clarify these differences in process. Is there a question?

[1:39:34] Voice 9: Any

[1:39:35] Trustee Patrick: comments?

[1:39:37] Trustee Patrick: I think it's just my understanding would be how to communicate how these what is all these

[1:39:41] Trustee Patrick: different processes and how this relates as well is that possible as the project goes on here as

[1:39:50] Trustee Patrick: part of the communications is

[1:39:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): that a question for staff yes absolutely

[1:39:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): and the tools that have been

[1:40:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): used in the past such as frequently asked questions documents webinars community information meetings

[1:40:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): using your advisory planning commission to make sure that as a focus group and as a test

[1:40:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): case of a population of residents of Gambier Island, they fully understand the project. They

[1:40:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): are instrumental in assisting staff and the local trust committee in conveying accurate

[1:40:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): scope of the project to the broader community as well. So the limit or the restrictions,

[1:40:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): of course, are always in terms of how much time and money does the local trust committee have

[1:40:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): access to or can allocate to do that work versus drafting the bylaw language and giving people

[1:40:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): that information in tandem so that they're actually looking at how does this impact or

[1:40:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): how could this potentially impact new development on my property? What are the steps that I would

[1:40:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): have to go through? Sometimes that's more helpful for people to see if I were to do X, this is the

[1:41:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): flow of an application. These are the costs associated with it. These are the guidelines

[1:41:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): that would be used to evaluate my application. And then they would see, ah, this is actually

[1:41:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): very limited in scope versus this is a provincial federal joint initiative to look at broader

[1:41:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): rights of waterfront property owners being amended in some way shape or form so at the local

[1:41:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): government level we are limited in our budget as you know you now have a new budget for this project

[1:41:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): I'm happy to execute and manage this project on your behalf to to the extent that we can that I

[1:41:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): I have to work within this budget.

[1:41:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): So you have to prioritize for me communications materials, engagement, the timing and the

[1:41:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): release of those versus the drafting of bylaws, engaging with the nation and ensuring that

[1:41:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): as you move forward, the draft language is grounded and reflected in what your scope

[1:41:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): of your project charter is right now, which is implementation of First Nations recommendations.

[1:42:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendations. If that's not the case, then we need to change the project charter. And that's on

[1:42:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): the agenda at every business meeting that this project is considered for you to do just that.

[1:42:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): The project charter is a living document. At any point in time, you can decide the scope of this

[1:42:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): project is going to be narrowed right down for this year or for this fiscal because of the

[1:42:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): strong public interest to focus specifically on community-based discussions and engagement

[1:42:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): management versus looking at draft by-law language so it is up to the local trust committee

[1:42:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): to direct staff how you'd like to proceed but there are some recommendations on page one of the report

[1:42:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): regarding an annotated draft development permit area for the shoreline protection

[1:42:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): option that would show advisory planning commission comments it would show squamish

[1:42:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): first nation staff comments and perhaps some staff analysis to go with that as the first

[1:43:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): public facing version to consider for for feedback and then the local trust committee

[1:43:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): can decide after that if there's gaps or insufficient information that needs to be

[1:43:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): addressed we can do that in a number of ways okay

[1:43:19] Voice 9: thank you um i'm sitting on all that for a minute

[1:43:24] Voice 9: Do you have any other?

[1:43:27] Voice 12: Yes, I do.

[1:43:30] Voice 12: I see in the report here, Sonia, or sorry, Tyler Zupanek,

[1:43:38] Voice 12: what looks like a lot of language that would go into a land use bylaw,

[1:43:43] Voice 12: not specifically amendments that are proposed for the official community plan per se.

[1:43:52] Voice 12: Just as a preliminary matter, how do I navigate this to figure out

[1:43:56] Voice 12: of what would be going into the OCP provision

[1:44:00] Voice 12: as opposed to revising the land use by-law?

[1:44:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): So some communities choose to have

[1:44:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): the official community plan include

[1:44:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): the entire development permit area.

[1:44:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): So the objectives, the justification,

[1:44:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): as well as the guidelines.

[1:44:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): Others split them up so that the official community plan

[1:44:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): only has the justification and the designation of the area,

[1:44:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): the land use bylaw contains the guidelines the reason for that is if you amend those guidelines

[1:44:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): you don't have to go through an entire ocp amendment process that's subject to provincial

[1:44:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): approval so staff are recommending that likely once we get to that stage of actually determining

[1:44:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): what changes need to happen in your official community plan versus your land use bylaw

[1:44:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): that will make and provide you with an analysis of the recommendation to either keep it together

[1:44:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): other or split it up so we're not really at that stage yet to worry about what goes in each

[1:44:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): document it's more are you using this tool under the local government act which is a development

[1:45:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): permit area to protect the shoreline or are you looking at a different mechanism and we're

[1:45:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): suggesting this is the most appropriate tool to regulate new development within a certain area of

[1:45:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the natural boundary of the sea?

[1:45:20] Voice 12: Well, my understanding of the OCP to use, you know,

[1:45:25] Voice 12: loose language is the official community plan

[1:45:28] Voice 12: is really a kind of a visioning document

[1:45:29] Voice 12: that sets the stage for the parameters for bylaws.

[1:45:36] Voice 12: And that language is pretty important

[1:45:40] Voice 12: depending on whether it be,

[1:45:43] Voice 12: because it sets the direction for the bylaws

[1:45:45] Voice 12: and helps define the direction of them in the sense that you could have an OCP

[1:45:59] Voice 12: that really emphasizes environmental protection over and above other values

[1:46:04] Voice 12: or you could have an OCP that does it, in a sense, makes it a priority,

[1:46:12] Voice 12: not just protection, but remediation.

[1:46:15] Voice 12: so that principled statement from the OCP that's what's definitional which is why I can say right

[1:46:26] Voice 12: away I've got real reservations about the idea of putting operational language in OCP because you

[1:46:33] Voice 12: never know how these things actually work out in practice until it starts happening again I think

[1:46:39] Voice 12: operationally the languages bylaw is the place for the actual technical requirements on

[1:46:47] Voice 12: applicants uh and the parameters of what the dpa should should have in it because then that makes

[1:46:52] Voice 12: it a lot easier for the local press committee to adapt to circumstances make amendments as necessary

[1:46:58] Voice 12: but as you say i mean that's we're getting ahead of ourselves there but in these materials

[1:47:04] Voice 12: uh i can say i'm not inclined to approve any language uh even preliminary language before

[1:47:11] Voice 12: before the staff has had an opportunity to walk us as trustees through it all in detail.

[1:47:19] Voice 12: And the reason I say that is like I'm, you know, after spending two and a half, some years working in the Keats bylaws.

[1:47:26] Voice 12: After that experience, what I concluded from that was it was not doing that at the earliest stage.

[1:47:34] Voice 12: that kind of rigorous review led to a lot of problems in terms of communicating the

[1:47:43] Voice 12: whole business to the community and how the community reacted to it. We've heard a certain

[1:47:47] Voice 12: amount of that today and I think it's, I would appreciate an opportunity to hear from the staff,

[1:47:56] Voice 12: but first of all I'd like to see the actual proposed language in the OCP like separated

[1:48:02] Voice 12: to do and that's the rest of it the technical requirements i see a lot of familiar things in

[1:48:07] Voice 12: there that came out of a lot of slogging when we're working on the keynes bylaws and that's

[1:48:12] Voice 12: gratifying but i'd like to uh i'd like staff to walk us through all of those details uh and

[1:48:19] Voice 12: this is going to be the meeting for it we don't have the time but a real working meeting where

[1:48:24] Voice 12: we work through the language because we don't do it now you know and we just come up with something

[1:48:30] Voice 12: and throw it out for first reading then we're going to have all this discussion that may or

[1:48:35] Voice 12: may not go anywhere but if there's things that we as trustees can identify uh right at the outset

[1:48:40] Voice 12: that are definite winners or definite losers then i think for the safety efficiency of the process

[1:48:48] Voice 12: we we should do our work uh in a much more rigorous way uh up front thanks if

[1:48:57] Trustee Patrick: i may um

[1:48:58] Trustee Patrick: I think that's what staff are attempting to do. I'm always frustrated with the endorsement language as well, because it's like, what does endorsement mean? This is not a bylaw. You're hearing again, I'm sensitive to the acronyms and things that we're using. We have no bylaws in front of us.

[1:49:16] Trustee Patrick: First reading would be putting it out for information in a bylaw-directed form.

[1:49:25] Trustee Patrick: We don't have bylaws before us.

[1:49:28] Trustee Patrick: What we have is some suggested language for this approach of using a development permit.

[1:49:36] Trustee Patrick: So it's not at all broken into that.

[1:49:38] Trustee Patrick: So I see this as our opportunity to have, if we agree to generally the direction that's here today, that that is what forms the engagement. No bylaws. So once that gets put into the bylaw form, that's a whole process on its own.

[1:49:59] Trustee Patrick: um so this is a very early stage can't can't approve it quickly because there's no bylaws

[1:50:06] Trustee Patrick: it's just language that's my understanding of how you presented it is that correct

[1:50:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): that's correct your advisory planning commission has also provided commentary and we're suggesting

[1:50:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): that this become the basis of what is returned back to squamish nation to follow up to say the

[1:50:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): local trust committee endorsed in principle your recommendation regarding shoreline development

[1:50:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): development permit area and this is a draft and we're seeking additional comments prior to public

[1:50:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement so that would be the sequence of events that staff's recommending today well

[1:50:41] Voice 12: may i speak

[1:50:41] Voice 12: to yes please i i you know i recognize the importance of having continuous frankly engagement

[1:50:48] Voice 12: with squamish nation uh i am very uneasy about potentially uh inadvertently disappointing

[1:50:59] Voice 12: appointing Squamish Nation by encouraging them to think that stuff that comes out in a preliminary

[1:51:04] Voice 12: way that we endorse is you know we're talking I'm hearing talk about how this is a general thing

[1:51:12] Voice 12: the language I see in here is very specific so this isn't an endorsement of a general approach

[1:51:17] Voice 12: it's an endorsement of a very specific approach and then if we

[1:51:21] Voice 12: go forward to whether it's a

[1:51:22] Voice 12: Squamish Nation or some other community group or some other interested party um it's it's

[1:51:30] Voice 12: disingenuous to say well we're talking about this is a general direction we want to go with it that's

[1:51:34] Voice 12: not a general direction it's a destination and that's before we as trustees have had really a

[1:51:41] Voice 12: chance to to scrutinize I'm going to apply some critical thinking to and there's a lot there I

[1:51:47] Voice 12: I mean, it's not something that can be done quickly. And I think we end up with a better engagement process at the end of the day if trustees don't defer the hard work and actually we start making up our minds ourselves at the policy level in terms of what the general direction should be before we start getting into this general language or a specific language.

[1:52:12] Voice 12: that's why i'm really hoping what i'd like to see is some no not a bylaw but a proposal or a draft

[1:52:22] Voice 12: proposal of what would actually be in the amendment to the ocp what is the principal

[1:52:29] Voice 12: direction we want to go in it's it's not so easy to excavate what the policy perspective is

[1:52:38] Voice 12: from all this this wording the in the ocp you have a very disciplined high level uh type language

[1:52:46] Voice 12: that gives you a kind of a very accessible uh understanding of what the purposes of the proposed

[1:52:52] Voice 12: dpa would be and its objectives and how they tie into section three of the act and i really think

[1:52:58] Voice 12: that's that's the thing we need to be addressing first that general language because this is an ocp

[1:53:04] Voice 12: review and uh it's not been my understanding it's supposed to be under the label ocp review it's

[1:53:13] Voice 12: just a rewrite land use and i think the community is entitled to have some input at the early stage

[1:53:22] Voice 12: about the big picture about the general principles because as i said before those shape what the

[1:53:27] Voice 12: specific language should be thanks

[1:53:30] Trustee Patrick: no no yes sorry no we don't have questions at this time

[1:53:40] Trustee Patrick: this is our discussion uh trustee stanford um

[1:53:45] Voice 9: i recognize that there is a disconnect here um

[1:53:50] Voice 9: I was hoping in some way to see more of an OCP language.

[1:53:56] Voice 9: I think it's easier for presenting ideas and concepts to public engagement process.

[1:54:06] Voice 9: If there's the visionary language of the OCP first, and then moving towards how could this look, whether it's denied, I think, yes, this kind of language does need to go within the land use bylaws.

[1:54:26] Voice 9: But we did agree that OCP and LEB was going to kind of move in step, because the other

[1:54:33] Voice 9: challenge that we have is the tendency to just do an official community plan review

[1:54:38] Voice 9: and then never actually change the land use bylaws, which causes a whole other set of

[1:54:43] Voice 9: difficulties.

[1:54:44] Voice 9: So I'm comfortable with moving in step.

[1:54:48] Voice 9: One of the questions I have, though, is if this is just one of the three big topics that

[1:54:54] Voice 9: that we want to go back to the Squamish Nation for comment.

[1:55:01] Voice 9: Why do we not wait for the other two guidelines and language

[1:55:07] Voice 9: from the APC and potentially from the community

[1:55:14] Voice 9: before we then take all three of the large principles

[1:55:18] Voice 9: principles for consideration back to squanch nation all at once, rather than going back and forth right now. I thought that's how we're doing it. I know it wasn't necessarily clarified, but I'm surprised that we're going back at this point, rather than not waiting for forestry response.

[1:55:40] Voice 9: response and it was dogs so they're kind of covered in here so rather than waiting for

[1:55:47] Voice 9: forestry response oh heritage conservation response as well is it cheaper yeah i mean

[1:55:56] Voice 9: i i think the other challenge that i'm just beginning to recognize this morning comment is

[1:56:01] Voice 9: because of our um budget it's really limiting how we are doing this and that's

[1:56:12] Voice 9: that's hugely concerning um i'm all for getting creative but i'm also cognizant of the impact of

[1:56:21] Voice 9: tight tight budgets on this big project and how it's our challenge on gambier is

[1:56:28] Voice 9: connecting effectively with our isolated communities so that's sort of the overall

[1:56:35] Voice 9: role concern that I'm having as opposed to the actual wording which um to trustee Bernardo's

[1:56:44] Voice 9: point yes I think we need to do the work but I want to see the language first but I don't think

[1:56:51] Voice 9: I want to see the language until I've had more input from the community and their initial response

[1:56:59] Voice 9: response to what could or could not work so I'm not really I mean I'm willing to let this out in

[1:57:10] Voice 9: this format in the simple ability to get more feedback but I'm not sure how it fits in going

[1:57:20] Voice 9: back to this formation for this but if uh plan of super nets would like to just clarify why we're

[1:57:29] Voice 9: separating the south going to the squatter station now rather than waiting for the other two um

[1:57:37] Voice 9: principles to come back sir

[1:57:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): i can speak to that please the

[1:57:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): the local trust committee gave

[1:57:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): direction to staff to draft this work yeah

[1:57:48] Trustee Patrick: the

[1:57:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): local trust committee endorsed in general

[1:57:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): the concept of a development permit area for shoreline protection that was back in october

[1:57:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): 2024. So that work's already been done. And what I'm hearing from Trustee Bernardo is that perhaps

[1:58:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): you still need to go back and revisit that. And that's not the staff's understanding is that you

[1:58:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): already endorsed the general concept, which was recommended strongly by Squamish Nation staff

[1:58:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): in their engagement with us over the course of a year. So they're very interested to see

[1:58:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): and they were interested to hear that you endorsed in principle those recommendations

[1:58:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendations and directed staff to prepare draft by law language. And now that we've done

[1:58:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): that, staff's understanding is that you would be very interested to hear back from the nation on

[1:58:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): whether or not this draft language hits the mark for what the actual implementation of this tool

[1:58:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): could look like and how it's applied to new development and whether or not greater exemptions

[1:58:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): or less exemptions were contemplated by the nation. Your entire project is grounded

[1:58:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): grounded in reconciliation and so that is the analysis and understanding that staff have had

[1:59:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): to use in terms of our lens for assisting you in rolling this project out to ensure that you have

[1:59:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): confidence when you are engaging with your community members to say that you have done

[1:59:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): the work with the nation to be assured that this is the closest that you could get to addressing

[1:59:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): their concerns perspectives and interests and now moving forward you are engaging with the

[1:59:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): community on that hard work from government to government so that does not your government to

[1:59:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): government engagement doesn't include community residents at this point you're still at this stage

[1:59:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): where the nation is is curious to see this draft and because it's a significant referral piece that

[1:59:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we would work with staff on.

[1:59:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): We don't want to send them, at this stage,

[1:59:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): hundreds of pages of draft text and language

[1:59:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): when we can target each.

[2:00:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): tool differently. So the development permit area is one. Heritage conservation area is potentially

[2:00:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): a second that you've given us direction to proceed with. And then the advocacy policies

[2:00:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): and general policies that your advisory planning commission is looking at in terms of forest

[2:00:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): stewardship and public docs, those are pieces that the APC is working on that would inform

[2:00:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): the general text amendments that you would see in a draft official community plan rewrite

[2:00:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): right and the land use bylaw implementation this is an OCP LUB project it has been so since you

[2:00:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): endorsed the first project charter so I don't want anyone thinking that this is just an official

[2:00:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): community plan review because it's not your project charter clearly states the title OCP LUB

[2:00:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): targeted review and the scope has included a DPA heritage conservation area as drafts for you to

[2:00:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): to consider. So if you're not comfortable with the language that's in this report at this point

[2:00:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): in time, and you're not ready to do and receive further input on it, that's fine. Then I need to

[2:01:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): understand the order and sequencing of how you would like to proceed with the review of this

[2:01:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): information, because I was under the understanding that we are assisting you in ensuring that this

[2:01:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): project will result in bylaws that the nation's interests, perspectives and concerns have been

[2:01:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): addressed as your contribution towards reconciliation through this review. That's how we

[2:01:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): framed the engagement. That's how we spent the budget money with the nation. And if there's been

[2:01:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): any deviation from that, this is an important time to reframe your project charter and specify what

[2:01:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): it is that the outcomes will be this time next year, because we have this fiscal budget to

[2:01:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): to undertake what would be that by-law drafting?

[2:01:57] Voice 12: You might be right.

[2:01:58] Voice 12: It might be time to rethink the project.

[2:02:00] Voice 12: I don't know.

[2:02:06] Voice 12: It's a real point of difficulty that as a local trust committee,

[2:02:13] Voice 12: we're not able to work on these things before having a formal business

[2:02:18] Voice 12: meeting, that we have to sort of discuss these things,

[2:02:21] Voice 12: work out the details try to identify a direction and provide it to staff all in the context of

[2:02:28] Voice 12: having basically one meeting where a proposition is presented to us and um i'm well aware that the

[2:02:38] Voice 12: plan for this project has been both an ocp and lub project my point that i've been trying to make is

[2:02:45] Voice 12: it's really important to get the ocp part of it done first because that and and or at least have

[2:02:52] Voice 12: some concise conceptual presentation that can go out to all communities to explain this is what

[2:03:00] Voice 12: we're doing and why we're doing and what we're trying to achieve with it and um i recall that

[2:03:08] Voice 12: october meeting very well and i think minus a minute if you will recall at that point i had

[2:03:15] Voice 12: reviewed many of the recommendations that had come from squamish nations and i expressed some

[2:03:20] Voice 12: reservation that staff had not pointed out to squamish nation that some of the things that

[2:03:25] Voice 12: they were asking for and which i understand fully why they're asking for it and have quite a bit of

[2:03:30] Voice 12: sympathy frankly uh but that we don't have the jurisdiction and i seem to recall at that point

[2:03:38] Voice 12: uh you'd said well that's not for the staff to tell them what our jurisdiction is or what they

[2:03:42] Voice 12: they can ask for it when they can't ask for it that's not true

[2:03:44] Voice 12: well that's how i understood

[2:03:46] Voice 12: but nothing

[2:03:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): in that engagement summary is outside the scope of your jurisdiction we made sure that

[2:03:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): this project engagement resulted in things that were squarely within the jurisdiction of this

[2:03:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): local trust committee to do uh

[2:04:00] Voice 12: you and i have different views about that now at that october

[2:04:04] Voice 12: meeting i think you will agree that i did express some reservations but at the end of the day i did

[2:04:11] Voice 12: did agree to move the thing forward and to ask staff to prepare the language and

[2:04:19] Voice 12: my recollection is as assured at that time that we would be talking about the details then

[2:04:26] Voice 12: that that was the point of developing the language not to just take you know bring it

[2:04:31] Voice 12: forward to one meeting where we approve it and then it goes out into the community

[2:04:35] Voice 12: as is my understanding or at least my expectation that's a better way of putting

[2:04:40] Voice 12: putting it, is that staff would prepare some sort of language

[2:04:44] Voice 12: and then we would be working with the staff, working through it,

[2:04:48] Voice 12: trying to understand it, assessing it, not simply be presented

[2:04:52] Voice 12: with language that we'd be asked to endorse right off the bat

[2:04:55] Voice 12: when it goes on for pages and pages of technical requirements.

[2:05:01] Voice 12: So I'm disappointed that where the staff is taking this

[2:05:05] Voice 12: is not a place where it's giving us as trustees an opportunity

[2:05:09] Voice 12: to work through the material.

[2:05:11] Voice 12: And I think in terms of the larger issue, there's a big issue here, which has got to do with, as a matter of principle, how we approach community engagement.

[2:05:24] Voice 12: Staff may need to rethink the strategy here.

[2:05:29] Voice 12: I fully appreciate that reconciliation is central, but it's not the only reason to do this review.

[2:05:36] Voice 12: The people who live on Gambier have something to say about it.

[2:05:39] Voice 12: and they need to have an early opportunity as the people who will be most affected by these changes

[2:05:45] Voice 12: to contribute to the discussion and what i'm talking about is giving trustees an opportunity

[2:05:54] Voice 12: to review the detail before we get to the point of circulating things and then moving on whether

[2:05:59] Voice 12: swamish nation or first reading of whatever we do it that we actually start getting into what

[2:06:04] Voice 12: these things mean now rather than later. I wish I could be more crystal clear about this but

[2:06:12] Voice 12: where I'm headed or at least where I'm at with this is I don't think it's reasonable that first

[2:06:20] Voice 12: recommendation to be simply asked without having a chance for us as a legislative body to work

[2:06:27] Voice 12: through the details to be asked to endorse anything. If you can change the language

[2:06:33] Voice 12: in terms of to describe what we're going to do with this language maybe we could we could work

[2:06:39] Voice 12: with that thank you

[2:06:41] Voice 10: trustee sanford although

[2:06:46] Voice 9: i recognize the perspective that trustee bernardo

[2:06:52] Voice 9: i'm kind of coming at i have a different perspective although i think in the end it's

[2:06:59] Voice 9: It's trying to clarify the same concerns, and that is we have had very limited ability

[2:07:10] Voice 9: to work with the communities on where this is going and how we move forward on principal

[2:07:23] Voice 9: statements.

[2:07:23] Voice 9: statements so when i received this kind of report i understood it that this is guidelines that could

[2:07:33] Voice 9: be used later in the land use bylaw and it's looking for like it's very clearly laid out

[2:07:40] Voice 9: here's the rationale here's the authority um but what is missing is again how we talk about

[2:07:48] Voice 9: how to fish community plan language which is what is the aspiration and it's i need a visual

[2:07:59] Voice 9: representation of that piece within the official community plan um i was hoping to and it sounds

[2:08:08] Voice 9: crazy but it almost needs to look great because we need to get people to connect with the vision

[2:08:15] Voice 9: first and then how does that translate into you know we've got guidelines but we don't we haven't

[2:08:23] Voice 9: even approached actual language the language is dialogue i don't know what the the path forward

[2:08:29] Voice 9: is um i don't see it quite as tight as we endorse or don't endorse um i'm trying to find a way to

[2:08:37] Voice 9: move this forward um and recognize that yes the squamish nation needs that ongoing response

[2:08:49] Voice 9: as well as the opportunity for the community to see this um and i'm also cognizant of our

[2:08:57] Voice 9: particular challenges with our advisory planning commission and the concerns of how they can move

[2:09:02] Voice 9: forward on the other projects given the level of work that this one took um i'm i'm looking for

[2:09:11] Voice 9: help because um i i want this to move forward but um i feel there's still a piece not that i'm not

[2:09:22] Voice 9: seeing and that's sort of that overall vision to tie everything together as to why um and it's

[2:09:32] Voice 9: it's certainly not sitting with the planners it's sitting with us and i just don't know how to

[2:09:36] Voice 9: translate that out in an action so

[2:09:40] Trustee Patrick: help i like whiteboards i know i wish we had a whiteboard

[2:09:43] Trustee Patrick: i'd like to draw pictures i'm a picture so where are we now and how this what this looks like um

[2:09:53] Voice 9: so yeah i'm looking for a way forward because we can't do this all day um there's a huge amount

[2:09:59] Voice 9: to work here um and oh charts all right i'll do that

[2:10:07] Trustee Patrick: so good to know it's over there

[2:10:08] Voice 9: yeah i need a way to

[2:10:14] Voice 9: work through this the specific language itself i'm i'm okay i i but i i want the input

[2:10:23] Voice 9: um before i make my deter i don't want to work through it and massage it right out

[2:10:28] Voice 9: before I've heard from the community and from a small church yeah but it's both

[2:10:34] Voice 9: of them so that's my issue so that's in that case yes it can be right but

[2:10:46] Trustee Patrick: there's a piece missing I just wanted to poke questions here let's just see this

[2:10:51] Trustee Patrick: is our discussion this is what you're getting to witness is our discussion

[2:10:54] Trustee Patrick: here why nobody shows up in there because we can't discuss behind scenes

[2:10:59] Trustee Patrick: this is our discussion. So it's like this is a piece, but we're missing the, like, to go to the public, it's the questions of policy, as you're talking about, what's the policy language, what does it look like, are there options on policy, maybe you're seeing something of that nature that we could get feedback on.

[2:11:22] Trustee Patrick: um this is the detailed guidelines which i do absolutely support would be in the land use bylaw

[2:11:29] Trustee Patrick: not the ocp like they are at salt spring every one of them so we have to get ministerial approval

[2:11:34] Trustee Patrick: to change a single guideline we're keeping it in the land use bylaw keeps the decisions happen at

[2:11:41] Trustee Patrick: this table

[2:11:42] Voice 9: yeah i i need a paragraph at the front of that aspirational language that we are trying

[2:11:51] Voice 9: to translate through and that it's done in a way that actually represents what our ocp will look

[2:11:58] Voice 9: like and i'm really hoping our ocp does not look like a legal document from from the 1980s that it

[2:12:07] Voice 9: currently is i i need it to be readable i need people to be able to relate to it and so far this

[2:12:15] Voice 9: is very clear this is and it's lovely but it's very planner orientated it's and i'm not sure how

[2:12:23] Voice 9: to connect.

[2:12:24] Voice 9: Thank you.

[2:12:27] Voice 9: Professor?

[2:12:27] Voice 9: Well,

[2:12:28] Voice 12: I think on that point,

[2:12:29] Voice 12: Trustee Safford, our agreement in that this is not,

[2:12:35] Voice 12: you know, we heard a lot today about, you know,

[2:12:38] Voice 12: transparency, accessibility,

[2:12:39] Voice 12: that's a complicated discussion,

[2:12:42] Voice 12: but simply pursuing things in the way

[2:12:46] Voice 12: that's being recommended by staff at this stage

[2:12:48] Voice 12: is not facilitating public access to the issues.

[2:12:57] Voice 12: uh i mean at least trustee sanford i mean you're right i mean this is language that

[2:13:04] Voice 12: planners understand where it's going there's clearly uh a principled approach behind it

[2:13:12] Voice 12: but i think it's incumbent on us as at this stage i don't know that we're not it should not be in

[2:13:20] Voice 12: the business of just pounding out language to finish it i mean i've got to be honest that was

[2:13:26] Voice 12: was certainly my impression when i came in and started looking working hard at this key spot of

[2:13:30] Voice 12: this and uh whether i'm right or wrong about it my impression of that was that was hasty work that

[2:13:39] Voice 12: had not been drilled into enough detail at the early stage and the community needs to know

[2:13:45] Voice 12: what we're talking about the direction we're going in the ocp thing i mean i think that's

[2:13:53] Voice 12: that's what we need to be focusing on now is draft concept it doesn't even have to be the

[2:13:58] Voice 12: draft bylaw that changes the ocp but the changes to the the keats ocp were very discreet very

[2:14:05] Voice 12: concise very principled you could see what they are saying and they set the direction for the

[2:14:11] Voice 12: language bylaw and the language bylaw is entirely consistent but the advantage of having something

[2:14:17] Voice 12: like that whether it's informal language or something else but a statement of principle

[2:14:23] Voice 12: and we can allows us to go to Squamish nation but also the community and third party third parties

[2:14:29] Voice 12: who are interested in these issues that sets the general direction and then they know that that's

[2:14:35] Voice 12: the debate should the general direction go all encompassing in one direction or a different

[2:14:40] Voice 12: direction should it be more balanced that is the fundamental question that will emerge when we

[2:14:45] Voice 12: start discussing those details and the fundamental direction of the changes to Gander's land use

[2:14:52] Voice 12: regulation you know those those larger principles the community needs an opportunity to take

[2:14:59] Voice 12: and i would suggest that i don't know how we're going to do it table this endorsement stuff because

[2:15:08] Voice 12: i don't think we're ready to endorse anything but i would like the staff to come back with some

[2:15:14] Voice 12: revised a revised package along the lines of something i'm talking about so that we can deal

[2:15:19] Voice 12: with it at that at that principle level and having it in the agenda that then gives members of the

[2:15:24] Voice 12: community to see that part of it which is really the starting point for the whole thing um i

[2:15:34] Voice 9: understand because we have so many people in the audience i know this is really hard to listen to

[2:15:40] Voice 9: but we um we're not allowed to meet about anything around decisions outside of a business meeting

[2:15:48] Voice 9: so we can't talk about any of this

[2:15:50] Voice 9: the local government act

[2:15:53] Voice 9: and that's part of how transparency works

[2:15:57] Voice 9: so this is, I know this is hard

[2:15:59] Voice 9: but I'm trying to process through

[2:16:02] Voice 9: how we have this discussion

[2:16:04] Voice 9: which is long and convoluted

[2:16:07] Voice 9: and yet move forward

[2:16:09] Voice 9: I don't think it's the staff situation

[2:16:11] Voice 9: I think it's our clarity to staff

[2:16:14] Voice 9: as to what we want

[2:16:16] Voice 9: now that we've seen it

[2:16:17] Voice 9: i i actually most of this i'm willing to move forward to to get feedback on because that's all

[2:16:26] Voice 9: it is right now like the one piece that is missing is the vision statement at the beginning that's

[2:16:32] Voice 9: the ocp part and that's the part that we'll talk about um the importance of uh access to the to the

[2:16:41] Voice 9: the individual landholders and to the communities, the importance of docks, the importance of

[2:16:48] Voice 9: our foreshore protection that has an overall principle, which is what the 2021 engagement

[2:16:57] Voice 9: process indicated, that we care about our shorelines.

[2:17:01] Voice 9: We care to keep them rural.

[2:17:03] Voice 9: It's that kind of language that then embeds this further language.

[2:17:08] Voice 9: So I don't think it's staff.

[2:17:10] Voice 9: I think it's us to provide that context at the top, that COCP.

[2:17:17] Voice 9: And I guess that's maybe what I feel missing.

[2:17:19] Voice 9: I'd love to move on from this.

[2:17:21] Voice 9: I just don't know how to get over that.

[2:17:26] Trustee Patrick: For me, too, I think part of our reconciliation is to have the conversations be very clear.

[2:17:34] Trustee Patrick: If we're asking for early feedback from the First Nations on this language,

[2:17:41] Trustee Patrick: i think we also have to be very clear that we haven't had the engagement yet so they understand

[2:17:45] Trustee Patrick: that so that we're being they're very clear to them that this is we're getting the early feedback

[2:17:49] Trustee Patrick: but we haven't had the engagement um so that that so that piece is sort of missing as well as to be

[2:17:55] Trustee Patrick: able to communicate that um very clearly as to where we are and what we can only say about this

[2:18:02] Trustee Patrick: what are we asking

[2:18:03] Voice 12: if i may i have real reservations but like a squamish nation

[2:18:08] Voice 12: with a lot of detailed

[2:18:10] Voice 12: language and us

[2:18:13] Voice 12: not being able to

[2:18:15] Voice 12: tell Squamish Nation

[2:18:17] Voice 12: that the Gambier

[2:18:20] Voice 12: community, the larger community, we

[2:18:22] Voice 12: haven't heard that they

[2:18:24] Voice 12: were not able to tell them that that input's

[2:18:26] Voice 12: been received and been considered by the

[2:18:28] Voice 12: local press committee because at the end of the day

[2:18:30] Voice 12: we're the body that's going to have to make a

[2:18:32] Voice 12: decision about where

[2:18:34] Voice 12: this ultimately ends up

[2:18:36] Voice 12: and if we don't know enough at

[2:18:38] Voice 12: this point it seems to me uh setting people up for disappointment you know we're having staff

[2:18:46] Voice 12: engage with squamish nation about things that we ourselves are uncertain the community

[2:18:52] Voice 12: it fits the community and before we've actually heard from the community about

[2:18:57] Voice 12: whether it feels for them and like um we have to be able to do these things we have to

[2:19:06] Voice 12: to do have a continuous engagement

[2:19:07] Voice 12: or ideally a

[2:19:09] Voice 12: continuous engagement with a Swamish nation

[2:19:12] Voice 12: as we develop this.

[2:19:14] Voice 12: But that can't be to the exclusion

[2:19:15] Voice 12: of the rest of the community because that engagement

[2:19:17] Voice 12: of a Swamish nation has

[2:19:20] Voice 12: to include bringing forward the perspective

[2:19:21] Voice 12: of the community. So it's not

[2:19:24] Voice 12: a serial thing. And

[2:19:26] Voice 12: in relation to that, I mean, stressing

[2:19:28] Voice 12: Stanford's point about having the overarching

[2:19:30] Voice 12: statement of principle, yes,

[2:19:32] Voice 12: very much for that. But it

[2:19:34] Voice 12: seems to me it's like a carpool for the horse thing.

[2:19:36] Voice 12: You know, I don't see how we can be okay with this language in a general way, direct staff to go preparing, you know, potential bylaws before we've actually looked at that large statement.

[2:19:49] Voice 12: Okay, but in that case, I need to have this term endorsed explained.

[2:19:54] Voice 12: Like, what does that really mean?

[2:19:56] Voice 9: First, Trustee Stamford?

[2:19:58] Voice 9: I don't, I'm going to keep going forever on this.

[2:20:02] Voice 9: I'm getting hungry.

[2:20:03] Voice 9: um i i'm sorry but i i'm looking for any kind of direction from staff to help us get over this

[2:20:11] Voice 9: hump as to for me which is the missing piece in this and so that we can provide some appropriate

[2:20:21] Voice 9: action because i'm also very aware that this has impact on the advisory planning commission which

[2:20:28] Voice 9: which now does not have enough members to keep them.

[2:20:31] Voice 9: I do want to get to that as well.

[2:20:34] Voice 9: So suggestions on the next step,

[2:20:37] Voice 9: given this point of disconnect

[2:20:42] Voice 9: that both Trustee and Bernardo have made in this petition?

[2:20:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): Sure.

[2:20:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): So if I may, through the Chair,

[2:20:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): the justification and objectives portion

[2:20:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the draft language of the development permit area

[2:20:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): would be part of your official community plan.

[2:20:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): we tend to not duplicate language in the OCP when it's because we read the bylaw in its entirety

[2:21:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): so this language that's in the justification section of this draft before you today and the

[2:21:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): objectives are what is in the could be in the official community plan and can be expanded

[2:21:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): to describe what it is that you've both articulated is broadening the justification

[2:21:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): certification ensuring that the objectives recognize the water access only dependency of

[2:21:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): title holders that type of language is the feedback that we're expecting to strengthen

[2:21:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): the draft in its subsequent renditions not necessarily having you know you may have a

[2:21:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): a specific section in the OCP that addresses this but you can just use the development permit area

[2:21:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): to really target why this is important for the community and how what the objectives of using

[2:22:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): this particular land use planning tool are because it coincides with you know right now you already

[2:22:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): have an OCP that speaks to the importance of those shorelines so we haven't redrafted that

[2:22:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): because you've identified specific tools that you want to use i'm starting to hear that there

[2:22:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): may be political uncertainty as to whether or not you want to use those tools i

[2:22:29] Trustee Patrick: was gonna say i

[2:22:30] Trustee Patrick: don't think you're hearing that necessarily i think it's more the presentation materials is the

[2:22:34] Trustee Patrick: yeah issue okay so the

[2:22:37] Trustee Patrick: development

[2:22:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): permit area draft that's before you then

[2:22:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): in terms of endorsing the language, whether you want to call that, you know, a starting point

[2:22:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): that you're not adopting, you're not doing anything other than saying this is a good

[2:22:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): starting point. And I'm hearing that it's not, that's okay. So what I do need to hear is what

[2:23:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): do you need in order to feel confident that when we engage back with the nations,

[2:23:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): that the feedback that you get is supportive of your decision-making authority because this is a

[2:23:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): first cut staff feel really confident that this particular development permit area covers a lot

[2:23:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): of basics your apc has provided you with some input so you do have a sense of the community's

[2:23:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): flavor and input because you appointed these members to do that that work on behalf of everyone

[2:23:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): everyone. So if there's anything missing, this is the time, this is the portion of your business

[2:23:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): meeting to support a discussion around you have some technical concerns or you have some policy

[2:23:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): language concerns and you would bring those to the table today so that I can record them

[2:23:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): and get some direction moving forward.

[2:23:57] Voice 9: Yeah. I hear that. I do follow along with that.

[2:24:03] Voice 9: it does make sense until we have the discussion here today i don't understand the implications

[2:24:14] Voice 9: it's until we talk about it and recognize the implications of how the language is being

[2:24:22] Voice 9: viewed by other members of the committee um i if we need that time to review so i don't have

[2:24:31] Voice 9: have language for you I have some minor little details but they were mainly something that I

[2:24:37] Voice 9: could look at based on feedback coming back what I'm missing is that first part and and so what I

[2:24:46] Voice 9: need from staff right now is given

[2:24:49] Voice 7: the

[2:24:50] Voice 9: discussion today what is your suggestion and it's not that

[2:24:54] Voice 9: we don't want to move forward on this or that we think it's completely inappropriate it's more

[2:25:00] Voice 9: more there's a piece that needs to tie it together that isn't as as um plannery's for a lack of lack

[2:25:12] Voice 9: of anything else so that we can then talk to our community as well given this is now out in the

[2:25:18] Voice 9: public realm so i just need a suggestion so i'm not sure

[2:25:25] Trustee Patrick: how to word it any suggestions

[2:25:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): I'm hearing that you'd like to expand language around the justification for the shoreline

[2:25:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): development permit area and possibly expand the objectives.

[2:25:47] Voice 9: Let's just keep the DPA wording separate right now.

[2:25:51] Voice 9: I'd like to expand the overall justification in visionary language for the OCP.

[2:25:59] Voice 9: and that is not it's not full justification it's just called here's where we're starting

[2:26:08] Voice 9: so

[2:26:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's a paragraph in that draft dpa that's specific to gambier shorelines is that remotely

[2:26:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): close to what it is that you're envisioning no

[2:26:21] Voice 9: i want to wear the vision statement so i'm wondering

[2:26:23] Voice 9: if the next step would be to take what is currently in the ocp here is the language

[2:26:28] Voice 9: which currently supports this, how can we augment it?

[2:26:34] Voice 9: So it fully fleshes out the principles

[2:26:39] Voice 9: that we have heard from the community

[2:26:43] Voice 9: and from the First Nations that we want to water them soon.

[2:26:51] Voice 10: Does this make sense?

[2:26:52] Voice 10: Yes, it's the why question, the problem statement,

[2:26:55] Voice 12: but go ahead, Mr. Bernardo.

[2:26:57] Voice 12: As usual, I'm in danger of competing myself.

[2:27:00] Voice 12: The why thing is, I fully endorse that part of it, that's really important because that

[2:27:06] Voice 12: does set the stage for how we understand and how we engage in the whole debate about this.

[2:27:12] Voice 12: So we need that, but that's a component that is essential to facilitate functional public

[2:27:20] Voice 12: engagement.

[2:27:20] Voice 12: That's a starting point for that.

[2:27:23] Voice 12: Where I'm coming from here, it's like when I hear language like move forward, I want

[2:27:27] Voice 12: want to move forward too because this is something that needs to get done but move forward is very

[2:27:32] Voice 12: general like what exactly does that mean uh does that mean we just bang up something great in a big

[2:27:38] Voice 12: hurry or do we proceed in a fashion that is calculated to facilitate as opposed to retard

[2:27:46] Voice 12: public engagement i'm not saying that's an intention anymore we heard a lot today about

[2:27:51] Voice 12: dissatisfaction public engagement process and it's important to point out that this is the

[2:27:55] Voice 12: beginning of it yes this project has been on the books for a long time that doesn't mean there's

[2:27:59] Voice 12: been a lot done because of resourcing issues we've acquired a certain amount of momentum

[2:28:06] Voice 12: bladder zubinak has done a lot of work on this and a lot of good work in particular engaging

[2:28:11] Voice 12: with squatters nation the big challenge is what do we do with it how do we proceed and i you know

[2:28:20] Voice 12: where i'm coming from is uh let's proceed in a fashion that encourages public engagement and

[2:28:29] Voice 12: i like there's something like 10 pages worth of language here

[2:28:34] Voice 12: and it's simply not reasonable to think that we could at one meeting go through all of them

[2:28:41] Voice 12: identify all the technical issues that we have objections to or comments about and deal with

[2:28:47] Voice 12: them at one meeting but it also begs the question about why are we getting this technical at this

[2:28:52] Voice 12: point before we've got division states i mean a lot of this does look like good work but we need

[2:28:58] Voice 12: a chance to go through it but before we do that again repeating the point trustee stanford i've

[2:29:03] Voice 12: made before we need to set the stage for the discussion so again i'd like to you know i don't

[2:29:11] Voice 12: know why why why we need language that says endorse the endorse means approve i don't think

[2:29:19] Voice 12: it's reasonable to ask the trust committee to approve anything before we've had a chance

[2:29:23] Voice 12: to go through it and that's kind of what i'm complaining about um

[2:29:30] Voice 11: yeah

[2:29:33] Voice 9: we're we're coming

[2:29:35] Voice 9: at this from two different angles and that's what's concerning me because it's very hard to be

[2:29:39] Voice 9: word on this. I think what you're talking about is something different from my overall language

[2:29:46] Voice 9: without getting to the ifs, buts, and very specifics. I don't have a problem because I'd

[2:29:51] Voice 9: rather hear back from external parties about it rather than me make the comments. We go through

[2:29:59] Voice 9: do all that.

[2:30:00] Voice 9: and then find out it's got nothing to do with it so the language itself i'm okay with it's the dpa

[2:30:06] Voice 9: so that's just one small part of this i'm going to challenge that we only gave ourselves ten

[2:30:12] Voice 9: thousand dollars for this and um the budget is not going to handle the engagement levels

[2:30:20] Voice 9: and this has always been our difficulty we do not give ourselves enough regular and resources

[2:30:27] Voice 9: resources to do the job we expect as soon as we see the actual writing and I'm very frustrated by

[2:30:36] Voice 9: that because this has been on the books and we just have not given it the resources that it needs

[2:30:44] Voice 9: and we've got excellent resources with our staff finally got it together I don't want to lose the

[2:30:51] Voice 9: by stalling i

[2:30:52] Voice 12: don't want to i don't want to lose a mentor either because it's been many years to

[2:30:57] Voice 12: this point what i would ask is during the lunch break if i'm assuming it can come up with some

[2:31:05] Voice 12: language first of all it gets away from from the suggestion that the local trust committee

[2:31:12] Voice 12: is approving anything before it really understands what it is so i can please get rid of the endorse

[2:31:18] Voice 12: If there's some other way that we can move the process forward so that whatever language is understood to be tentative and subject to input, and we have the vision statement that Chelsea Stanford talked about, yes, then I think we can move this stuff forward that way.

[2:31:38] Trustee Patrick: So you're looking for two things. One is I think we're looking for something to accompany this.

[2:31:42] Trustee Patrick: So yes, we're looking for something to accompany this at a higher level that sets sort of the OCP statement that applies this language to the DPA and eventually the LU.

[2:31:55] Trustee Patrick: Correct. And then we're looking for something of, what is the word or what does the motion look like if we were to move forward to the next step?

[2:32:05] Trustee Patrick: that's more continue

[2:32:08] Voice 12: to work on that project continue to work develop the language whatever

[2:32:12] Voice 12: but don't ask no

[2:32:14] Trustee Patrick: or you can even say have words like seek early comments from the first nations

[2:32:20] Trustee Patrick: or something of this nature so that it's very specific as to where we are we're not endorsed

[2:32:24] Trustee Patrick: okay gotcha so we're going to take a break we're sorry uh uh we're leaving you working

[2:32:30] Trustee Patrick: uh we are going to take a break we're not taking comments right now although you can always talk

[2:32:35] Trustee Patrick: to individuals during the lunch break and chase them down. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:32:41] Voice 18: All of you who are leaving probably now, thank you very much for coming. Make sure we know

[2:32:50] Voice 18: who you are so that we can stay in communication. Do not allow ourselves to be divided. Do not allow

[2:32:59] Voice 18: Well,

[2:33:00] Trustee Patrick: we're taking breaks, so we're on break here.

[2:33:03] Trustee Patrick: So thank you.

[2:33:06] Trustee Patrick: And subscribe.

[2:33:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): Can you confirm what time you're expecting to reconvene, please?

[2:33:12] Voice 10: 30 minutes.

[2:33:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yeah, 30 minutes.

[2:33:15] Voice 10: Don't work back.

[2:33:17] Voice 11: Yeah, 30 minutes.

[2:33:18] Voice 10: All right, guys.

[2:33:31] Voice 10: trustee

[2:33:33] Voice 10: I am a trustee

[2:34:10] Voice 11: Thank you.

[3:06:06] Voice 11: actually i found that we're back uh oh there we are

[3:06:19] Trustee Patrick: all right well welcome back from uh london

[3:06:22] Trustee Patrick: we're going to resume our meeting we were still in item 10.1 on the agenda which is the major

[3:06:30] Trustee Patrick: project for the gambier island fishing community plan and land use bylaw uh so we left you uh

[3:06:38] Trustee Patrick: planners and connect with some homework so you can come up with any ideas or suggestions to move us

[3:06:43] Trustee Patrick: through this hi

[3:06:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): uh so i i would suggest that you just ignore recommend staff recommendation number

[3:06:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): one uh consider staff recommendation number two i have alternate wording for staff recommendation

[3:07:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): number three let's pull that up on my screen but the gambier island local trust committee

[3:07:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): Many request staff to prepare a draft

[3:07:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): annotated shoreline development permit area document

[3:07:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): based on the language provided

[3:07:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): in the March 25th, 2025 staff report,

[3:07:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): including recommended amendments

[3:07:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): by the Advisory Planning Commission,

[3:07:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): referral recommendations from Squamish Nation

[3:07:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): and draft policy language supporting shoreline protection

[3:07:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): and return to the LTC for review

[3:07:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): and consideration of next steps.

[3:07:32] Voice 9: Yeah, it's here on the screen.

[3:07:34] Voice 10: If you need to see it.

[3:07:35] Voice 10: I do need to see it.

[3:07:36] Voice 10: I was with lots of support.

[3:07:38] Voice 10: Yeah.

[3:07:39] Voice 10: And

[3:07:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): then no other further changes to the staff recommendations on page one of the staff report?

[3:07:59] Voice 9: Yes, please.

[3:08:00] Voice 9: How do I address my need for an OCP vision statement as to where this is coming from?

[3:08:12] Voice 9: Can I come up with something that

[3:08:16] Trustee Patrick: is totally draft?

[3:08:17] Trustee Patrick: She put it in that new revised one.

[3:08:19] Trustee Patrick: So draft policy language supporting shoreline protection is what she's suggesting to be put into number three.

[3:08:28] Trustee Patrick: so that would include that how

[3:08:30] Voice 12: does that sorry but how does that impress the not necessarily

[3:08:35] Voice 12: that we want to have the cp language now like specifically of cp language but the

[3:08:40] Voice 12: the vision part the vision statement you know analogous to what the change was that was

[3:08:46] introduced to um the keats ocp as part of the shoreline is

[3:08:53] Voice 12: basically a statement of principle

[3:08:56] Voice 12: And is that, does the language proposed for three include that?

[3:09:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yeah.

[3:09:05] Voice 12: Because I don't see it.

[3:09:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): You can change that recommendation to whatever works.

[3:09:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): That's what I'm offering for you.

[3:09:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): Please wordsmith it so that it meets your needs.

[3:09:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): And I will take that direction.

[3:09:20] Trustee Patrick: I'm getting involved.

[3:09:21] Trustee Patrick: Can you put it back up on the screen?

[3:09:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yes, I can.

[3:09:27] Trustee Patrick: or huddle the same

[3:09:37] Voice 10: sentence was what she was intending to mean that did

[3:09:47] Voice 9: i say draft

[3:09:49] Voice 9: official community plan

[3:09:56] Voice 10: is

[3:10:04] Voice 9: vision and policy language two opposing things so i was going to say cp vision

[3:10:12] Voice 9: slash policy language yes

[3:10:19] Trustee Patrick: yeah that would be better because your ocp is very

[3:10:22] Trustee Patrick: very visionless well

[3:10:24] Voice 9: it's just on everything yeah

[3:10:26] Trustee Patrick: so

[3:10:27] Voice 9: that's nothing so does that work for people is

[3:10:33] Voice 9: that clear enough for staff in terms of direction i what i want to do is take what we have in the

[3:10:42] Voice 9: ocp and then massage it so i'm happy to come up with some drafts of that well what trustees

[3:10:56] Voice 12: stanford's proposing in terms of uh three i think answers the ocp vision so i'd be able to support

[3:11:04] Voice 12: that one okay um i'm gratified to hear the suggestion that we just brought the endorsement

[3:11:10] Voice 12: thing number two i don't object to going back to squamish nation but i i um i i want us to be

[3:11:20] Voice 12: really clear what staff does that uh that squamish nation is fully informed about about the status of

[3:11:30] Voice 12: the situation that this is all very preliminary and they are alerted that there's no guarantee

[3:11:37] Voice 12: that the language is being brought to them is the ultimate language or that the ltc has approved it

[3:11:43] Voice 12: or the community has even had a chance to think about that it really is

[3:11:48] Voice 12: uh very much a provisional draft working document no guarantees where it's going

[3:11:55] Voice 12: now obviously you're not going to put that in resolution but that's the you know i'm fine with

[3:11:59] Voice 12: the language as it is so long it's very clear the staff understands that that's the direction that

[3:12:04] Voice 12: that we need to go and the squamish nation needs to be act it needs to have a very accurate

[3:12:09] Voice 12: accurate understanding of where we're at yes

[3:12:11] Voice 9: so okay um I would like to get home tonight yes um

[3:12:18] Voice 9: is it okay if I move recommendation to you we'll do them separately yeah we can talk about them

[3:12:24] Voice 9: and classify them okay go for it so I move that the Gander Animal Trust Committee requests staff

[3:12:29] Voice 9: to re-engage with uh which one am I is this oh she hasn't changed okay uh with Scholars Nation

[3:12:39] Voice 9: to review the draft general line development permit area language as attached to the staff

[3:12:45] Voice 9: report dated March 25, 2025, and provide the LTC with any suggested amendments from the

[3:12:51] Voice 9: nation for consideration prior to further discussion.

[3:12:56] Voice 9: Is there a second?

[3:12:58] Voice 9: Seconded

[3:12:59] Trustee Patrick: by Trustee Bernardo.

[3:13:00] Trustee Patrick: No discussion.

[3:13:04] Voice 9: I mean, I think it's the way to move forward.

[3:13:07] Voice 9: I do.

[3:13:08] Voice 9: You know, I need it to be clear that we now have the community engaged.

[3:13:14] Voice 9: they will be engaging so this is going to be the public as well um doesn't need to go in the

[3:13:22] Voice 9: motion because we're not going to do anything but we've got their attention now which is a

[3:13:28] Voice 9: good thing let the engagement proceed with the debate um

[3:13:38] Voice 10: no but losing

[3:13:45] Voice 12: track i'm sorry

[3:13:46] Voice 12: it but i second that's pretty good yes right yeah um i'd

[3:13:57] Voice 10: like to see the language see it because

[3:14:01] Voice 12: sorry you know i heard trust example saying something about part of the engagement no she

[3:14:04] Trustee Patrick: did not it's the emotion is not is but yeah you're

[3:14:07] Trustee Patrick: not cheating you're not carrying this emotion no

[3:14:08] Trustee Patrick: emotion was done ever presented okay yeah

[3:14:10] Voice 12: well you were talking about public engagement mixed

[3:14:15] Voice 12: up there but uh it's basically i just um the point i made before i just want to raise the

[3:14:25] Voice 12: Again, I will actually discuss it on this motion, but I would hope that this, when we

[3:14:33] Voice 12: do return to Squamish Nation with whatever we're going to, that we emphasize the provisional

[3:14:40] Voice 12: entry of this.

[3:14:43] Voice 12: And I guess I have a question for staff.

[3:14:46] Voice 12: My fellow trustees here, A, I guess whether my fellow trustees agree that that should

[3:14:51] Voice 12: be made clear to Squamish Nation, and B, does the staff need any changes to the language

[3:14:57] Voice 12: to undertake that or to simply understood it.

[3:15:03] Voice 10: From my point of view, I think it's fairly clear.

[3:15:10] Voice 10: We're at the beginning of the process,

[3:15:11] Voice 9: and I'm going to...

[3:15:18] Trustee Patrick: Okay, thank you.

[3:15:21] Trustee Patrick: Yeah, no, I think that's, I think that's important to me as well,

[3:15:26] Trustee Patrick: that we're just very, very clear in communications

[3:15:29] Trustee Patrick: with the Spanish First Nation that we, where we are in the process,

[3:15:35] Trustee Patrick: us and that needs to be drawn out to

[3:15:38] Voice 12: be clear um what we say in the language of three is it is a

[3:15:44] Voice 12: fair enough reading to say that it's quite clear from this that it's further public engagement

[3:15:51] Voice 12: and things are provisional but that is a that's an that's an inference it's that that's fairly

[3:15:57] Voice 12: clear that people are quite familiar with our process here but it's it's pretty antiseptic

[3:16:03] Voice 12: language it's not being as direct uh about the point which is like don't put any weight on any

[3:16:12] Voice 12: of this stuff until this whole process is put up and uh i just don't want there to be any

[3:16:24] Voice 12: staging of this and i guess i have got a question for staff i mean is staff comfortable with

[3:16:30] Voice 12: making that point in kind of an

[3:16:32] Voice 12: informal way, but rather than

[3:16:33] Voice 12: just presenting with this resolution

[3:16:36] Voice 12: in that type of language, just

[3:16:37] Voice 12: speaking to staff over there

[3:16:40] Voice 12: in Squamish Nation and saying, look,

[3:16:42] Voice 12: this is what we're asking.

[3:16:45] Trustee Patrick: I guess that was a question to you, Planner Zupanek.

[3:16:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): I have

[3:16:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): no problem engaging

[3:16:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): with the staff of the nation and being

[3:16:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): crystal clear about the

[3:16:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): limitations of my

[3:16:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): influence and impact in

[3:17:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): and making recommendations and how those decisions play out,

[3:17:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): let alone trying to predict the direction

[3:17:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): that a local trust committee is going to go

[3:17:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): with these bylaws.

[3:17:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): My number one job is to assure them that you are committed

[3:17:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): to listening and hearing back

[3:17:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): and authentically considering all input

[3:17:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): prior to adoption of these bylaws.

[3:17:22] Trustee Patrick: Good enough for me, thank you.

[3:17:23] Trustee Patrick: Trustee Stamford, just a quick comment.

[3:17:27] Voice 9: Trustee Bernardo, they've been doing a lot of this

[3:17:30] Voice 9: in other communities so they are aware of how it can go and not go and where they're in the end

[3:17:42] Voice 9: then they can make some decisions and um so i think i think this is clear yep

[3:17:49] Voice 12: you know

[3:17:50] Trustee Patrick: i think the plan is opening that i thought comfort from those remarks

[3:17:52] Trustee Patrick: so thank you for that any further discussion all about then all those in favor and that carries

[3:18:01] Trustee Patrick: so you'll have to bring number three back up on the screen again uh for us just for speak do you

[3:18:09] Trustee Patrick: like want me to read it yeah i will read what's on the screen and then one of you can agree to

[3:18:14] Trustee Patrick: make it or not uh move that the gambier island local trust committee request staff very draft

[3:18:20] Trustee Patrick: annotated shoreline development permit area document based on the language provided in the

[3:18:26] Trustee Patrick: the March 25, 2025 staff report, including recommended amendments by the Advisory Planning

[3:18:34] Trustee Patrick: Commission, referral recommendations from Squamish Nation, draft official community plan vision

[3:18:41] Trustee Patrick: slash policy language supporting shoreline protection, and return to the LTC for review

[3:18:47] Trustee Patrick: and consideration of next steps. I'll move that. It's moved by Trustee Stanford, seconded by

[3:18:54] Trustee Patrick: trustee bernardo discussion thank you i

[3:18:59] Voice 12: think we discussed it i think it works

[3:19:01] Voice 12: all

[3:19:02] Trustee Patrick: right then i'll call the vote all those in favor and that carries so trustee snapper

[3:19:10] Trustee Patrick: doesn't get home and we go on to uh item number four do we need to uh discuss this one further

[3:19:17] Trustee Patrick: this is about our work plan and budget to uh implement the advisory planning commission

[3:19:27] Voice 12: Can I ask a point of clarification, please do? What do we mean by implement? Does that mean work into the materials? Or, I mean, implement has this kind of definite, we're going to make it happen thing, but we're not making anything happen. We're working on stuff at the moment.

[3:19:44] Voice 12: I'm wondering, I just want to clarify that I'm inferring that implement necessarily means working those recommendations into the draft documents, whatever draft documents.

[3:20:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): Correct. This recommendation, if it's not clear, is that the local trust committee has had a week to review the staff report and determine which actual recommendations from the APC you wish to implement to support this project.

[3:20:14] Trustee Patrick: So I guess the question is, is there any that you do not wish to implement?

[3:20:17] Trustee Patrick: Well,

[3:20:18] Voice 12: I'd like to hear my colleagues go through them, especially from Trustee Stamford, who has an acute interest, if I can here, about the recommendations that are coming from PNPC.

[3:20:32] Voice 12: see i mean before we do the implementing part you know working it into anything

[3:20:40] Voice 12: maybe we should be at least a preliminary review but whether any of them

[3:20:45] Voice 12: uh are so off the mark that they should not be included or some of them are so on the mark that

[3:20:50] Voice 12: we absolutely insist they be included so i'm going to look to trustee sanford for some guidance

[3:20:58] Voice 12: In

[3:21:00] Voice 9: general I think all this makes sense. There was just more comments on language as opposed

[3:21:11] Voice 9: to intent and call to action terminology didn't really fit my understanding of how we operate

[3:21:23] Voice 9: this is a land-finding organization but if that's your preference I want to give

[3:21:30] Voice 9: the APC as much leeway as possible given the work they've done and and that

[3:21:38] Voice 9: provides confidence to the community that where we can we're letting them provide

[3:21:48] Voice 9: with the direction within the community and that really important things you'll be able to

[3:21:56] Voice 9: make those decisions so that was

[3:21:59] Voice 9: really the only thing is that's the terminology

[3:22:01] Voice 9: more than the actual uh resort the details and it's like that but i have other concerns about

[3:22:08] Voice 9: the inconsistency that's mainly just so that people are great it's mainly how fast how much

[3:22:18] Voice 9: work this is taking and the ability for us to keep our APC going so that's a different conversation.

[3:22:28] Voice 12: Well it is in fairness it is early stages in terms of the APC as well in terms of

[3:22:33] Voice 12: reviewing things that as we've heard in other contexts whatever works its way into this

[3:22:42] Voice 12: you know revision of language now again none of that's none of that's you know written stuff.

[3:22:52] Trustee Patrick: what about the engagement that are you good with the engagement pieces that are

[3:22:57] Trustee Patrick: recommended by the apc yeah good question

[3:22:59] Voice 9: well that's what i've been looking at yeah i think

[3:23:05] Voice 9: they recognize our limitations in this island it's mainly what isn't here which i appreciate

[3:23:13] Voice 9: they understand um and i didn't expect anything different because they would understand that

[3:23:19] Voice 9: newspapers community newspapers aren't part of it and all those kind of things so they really

[3:23:24] Voice 9: have targeted the few tools that we do have to start the process and then we have to work with

[3:23:32] Voice 9: the individual community profiles for instance we know sea ranch has a an apc uh or uh an atm at a

[3:23:41] Voice 9: certain time of year and it's the best time to to connect with them so that day those kinds of

[3:23:48] Voice 9: local information is is what will help us against so

[3:23:55] Trustee Patrick: i guess that's my question so

[3:23:58] Trustee Patrick: if stuff for working on the apc engagement recommendations how

[3:24:06] Trustee Patrick: you know do they need further input on additional considerations would that be something different

[3:24:16] Voice 9: it's like i said it's not cast in stone they're in their heading

[3:24:27] Voice 10: I think

[3:24:29] Voice 12: it's not surprising to me the number one thing they have on here is, you know,

[3:24:37] Voice 12: update the project page of the website.

[3:24:42] Voice 12: Website, we're doing the best we can, given the circumstances, but it's not the...

[3:24:50] Voice 12: i mean everything we need is actually typically it's there but you know you need a headlamp to

[3:24:55] Voice 12: find it you know it's pretty hard so if we can whatever we can do to sort of uh tweak things

[3:25:03] Voice 12: uh you know to to bring it closer to the surface when somebody clicks on gambier that project page

[3:25:10] Voice 12: just jumps out it's just they can find a portal or i think it just sort of opens the doors to

[3:25:15] Voice 12: all the information they need very easy you know easier way than we have now that would be very

[3:25:21] Voice 12: healthy

[3:25:21] Trustee Patrick: the other thing we're doing on salt spring is we're just beginning our ocp project is we're

[3:25:26] Trustee Patrick: tasking staff at every step of the way as feedback does come in carefully analyzed as to who's not

[3:25:34] Trustee Patrick: being represented so that we can specifically go focus and find the voices that we're not hearing

[3:25:42] Trustee Patrick: so it's a big challenge on staff but it's an important one to us that we really understand

[3:25:48] Trustee Patrick: where the feedback is coming from and understand how that we might have to work differently to go

[3:25:53] Trustee Patrick: and get those voices right so who wants to so i tackle that motion number four well hang on

[3:26:04] Trustee Patrick: don't we have to go for this yeah we haven't put it on the floor well

[3:26:08] Voice 12: we've had our debate

[3:26:08] Voice 12: you know

[3:26:09] Trustee Patrick: there's no motion on the floor

[3:26:12] Voice 12: oh there's uh there's no motion for three we are number three

[3:26:16] Voice 12: yeah we voted on oh sorry i mean number four

[3:26:19] Trustee Patrick: i'm

[3:26:20] Voice 12: confused we're

[3:26:21] Trustee Patrick: at number four because you

[3:26:22] Voice 12: talked well i see you talk about the

[3:26:24] Trustee Patrick: apc we're talking about the apc one the number four you

[3:26:27] Trustee Patrick: were talking

[3:26:27] Voice 12: about that's right sorry i just got confused my check marks but

[3:26:30] Trustee Patrick: right

[3:26:31] Voice 12: don't we have

[3:26:32] Voice 12: to vote for that but

[3:26:33] Trustee Patrick: we haven't someone has to make it i'm making it okay so moved to read it

[3:26:39] Trustee Patrick: no we did not read it out the minute taker agrees so uh please read it out i know that

[3:26:50] Voice 9: the gander on local trust committee requests staff to prepare for a draft work plan and

[3:26:54] Voice 9: prejudice advisory planning commission recommendations specified select abc

[3:27:00] Voice 9: recommendations like communication products for

[3:27:03] Voice 12: you those are instructions

[3:27:04] Voice 12: in

[3:27:05] Voice 9: attachment two of the march 25th 2025 staff report for aps

[3:27:11] Voice 9: is there a second

[3:27:16] Trustee Patrick: by trustee bernardo discussions any further discussion all right

[3:27:21] Trustee Patrick: yeah all the vote all those in favor okay

[3:27:26] Voice 5: sorry maybe i'm not maybe sonya's clear but you didn't

[3:27:30] Voice 5: specify are you just implementing all of them yes yep the

[3:27:34] Voice 9: good idea is whether they're all

[3:27:36] Voice 9: like they'll all come to fruition and i i think we've got it yeah okay

[3:27:42] Voice 5: so you might want to say

[3:27:43] Voice 5: that in the uh resolution because right now it's reading as just specify select a pcr recommendation

[3:27:49] Voice 5: so if you want to specify which ones you're interested in

[3:27:51] Voice 9: i'm going to make an amendment

[3:27:54] Voice 5: okay i'm

[3:27:58] Voice 9: going to amend the motion to state to beginning to implement the apc commission

[3:28:11] Voice 9: to implement all the recommendations the advisory planning commission just

[3:28:20] Voice 12: have to stick the word

[3:28:21] Voice 12: in all before okay

[3:28:22] Voice 9: you do that sounds good i'm i'm completely okay

[3:28:25] Voice 12: uh i move an amendment to

[3:28:28] Voice 12: the motion uh so that the word all is inserted uh between the word implement ends up yeah that's

[3:28:38] Voice 9: what i did

[3:28:40] Voice 12: and the word specify select apc recommendations and communication products

[3:28:46] Voice 12: be deleted from from the motion was

[3:28:51] Trustee Patrick: that necessary did you not put that in i didn't

[3:28:54] Trustee Patrick: you don't need the second part that's just the all i never said the same part all right then

[3:28:59] Trustee Patrick: is there a second to the motions seconded by trustee stamford any discussion all the vote

[3:29:04] Trustee Patrick: all those in favor so it's now amended to read to implement all the advisory planning commission any

[3:29:12] Trustee Patrick: further discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor that carries as well so now we're on to

[3:29:18] Trustee Patrick: another endorsed language here on the uh project charter are there changes that need to be made to

[3:29:24] Trustee Patrick: project charter with

[3:29:27] Voice 9: the project charter okay chair um i'm just concerned about timelines for

[3:29:35] Voice 9: the apc given that you still have to find members of the abc although it's tons of volunteers now

[3:29:45] Voice 9: the challenges that that particular group is having i am concerned about how that impacts us

[3:29:54] Voice 9: so if there's

[3:29:56] Voice 9: enough

[3:29:56] Voice 9: greater

[3:29:57] Voice 9: worth

[3:29:57] Voice 9: in

[3:30:00] Voice 9: project charter, I mean I

[3:30:02] Voice 10: guess in the end

[3:30:02] Voice 9: we can always end it again. This is your chance.

[3:30:07] Voice 9: I don't want to lose that window this summer of providing engagement opportunities while

[3:30:14] Voice 9: people are on the island.

[3:30:20] Voice 10: So as long

[3:30:28] Voice 9: as we think we can do at least some of those person style

[3:30:38] Voice 9: dial engagement opportunities um that this this is a reason i'd like that i that it's moving into

[3:30:48] Voice 9: 2026 so

[3:30:55] Voice 11: no amendments then it's okay i'm

[3:31:00] Voice 12: uh i'm gonna defer to trustee stanford on this because

[3:31:02] Voice 12: i mean this is a gambier thing and how this all intersects the community there is

[3:31:10] Voice 12: which is in a better position to judge than I am.

[3:31:16] Voice 9: Chair, realistically, engagement opportunities are going to come

[3:31:21] Voice 9: as people respond to the options being provided,

[3:31:27] Voice 9: like Facebook update, community newsletters, those kind of things.

[3:31:31] Voice 9: And then as we find opportunity gatherings,

[3:31:35] Voice 9: that's where the APC and the makeup of the APC will help us connect

[3:31:40] Voice 9: to those. Often we just don't hear because if you like, Beacon's Point can have their little picnic

[3:31:49] Voice 9: and nobody will know unless somebody from Beacon's Point says hey this is a good opportunity. I think

[3:32:05] Voice 9: it's as good as we can get. Well then a motion would be appreciated and I'd fly back to the

[3:32:11] Voice 9: pages number 50. page 50. nothing sticks out yes

[3:32:20] Voice 9: i move the anger i local trust committee endorsed the amended ocpl uv review project charter

[3:32:34] Voice 9: is there a

[3:32:36] Trustee Patrick: second i'll second

[3:32:37] Trustee Patrick: that tristan bernard on discussion

[3:32:39] Voice 12: yeah i mean again i view this as uh one of the iterative steps that happen in a process like

[3:32:50] Voice 12: this and that i mean it's fine as it is it's uh it's fine given where we're at at this moment

[3:32:58] Voice 12: but i can see that um the things that are out of the scope they're not coming into the scope but

[3:33:06] Voice 12: things like hypothetically economic development in terms of things like tourism private institutional

[3:33:13] Voice 12: things parks trails those are considerations that come up when you're discussing the other stuff

[3:33:20] Voice 12: yeah okay i could see that happening but i also see things coming into scope later on for example

[3:33:29] Voice 12: there may be things that emerge out of the consultation engagement process

[3:33:36] Voice 12: outside of the first nation perspectives that become quite material to this that's quite

[3:33:41] Voice 12: possible we don't know what those might be so we have no reason to say that now

[3:33:46] Voice 12: But I just made the point to highlight that just because something is in the Charter, if something comes up that looks like a very good idea or a smart way to proceed or solves a real problem, that we might well have to come back to the Charter and end it at that point, if and when that comes to the surface.

[3:34:10] Voice 12: So, again, it's an iterative process.

[3:34:13] Voice 9: Justice Stanford?

[3:34:14] Voice 9: I know that that's a real concern with the regional district reviewing the seven OCPs

[3:34:23] Voice 9: that it's responsible for.

[3:34:25] Voice 9: So we're coming up with a process for those items that come up as a community issue.

[3:34:34] Voice 9: We have a way to place them.

[3:34:37] Voice 9: We can't deal with them right now.

[3:34:39] Voice 9: otherwise we get this forever but that there is a way to work the board into a class

[3:34:47] Voice 9: so i think we can make that happen

[3:34:50] Trustee Patrick: yeah right i think there will be a probably a better idea

[3:34:53] Trustee Patrick: of a future to-do list following this process yes all right then i'll call the vote all those

[3:34:58] Trustee Patrick: in favor and that carries and then we're now finally talking about the advisory planning

[3:35:03] Trustee Patrick: Commission's final motion that's here.

[3:35:07] Voice 9: So with this one, I just want to acknowledge we have a

[3:35:12] Voice 9: member of the ABC here. We have three people that did not get selected first. And I'm wondering if

[3:35:30] Voice 9: that's a more efficient way to put the call out to them first. But thinking about it, because of

[3:35:40] Voice 9: the interest that we've had today i think we can have again those people knowing that those people

[3:35:48] Voice 9: are still on the list um i think it might be the best bet to advertise and for advertising

[3:35:56] Voice 9: can i just get a question clarification to staff legislatively do you still have to put it through

[3:36:02] Voice 9: the newspaper i believe

[3:36:04] Voice 5: so circles our budget well i don't know that sonia do you have clarity would

[3:36:11] Voice 5: Would it come out of this budget or it's separate?

[3:36:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): The APC has a specific budget.

[3:36:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): The advertising would likely exceed what's remaining in that budget.

[3:36:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): So it would come out of the project funds.

[3:36:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): In the interim, we have to work with what we have

[3:36:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): and we can get a resolution from the local trust committee

[3:36:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): to allocate funds from the major project budget

[3:36:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): to support that APC recruitment.

[3:36:40] Voice 9: So to be crystal clear,

[3:36:41] Voice 9: there is no way of doing this without having to go to the newspaper which is the least effective

[3:36:48] Voice 9: and most expensive way to reach out to our community well

[3:36:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's other ways to reach out

[3:36:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): to your community we just have to meet that requirement for advertising but you can still

[3:37:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): use all other avenues to point people to the official advertisement which could be on the

[3:37:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): website in the newspaper so everyone's getting the same information about what's what the call

[3:37:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): is for seeking expressions of interest to be appointed you can do that through your email

[3:37:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): distribution list yeah

[3:37:20] Voice 9: no i understand it's i'm just trying to get around that i don't know

[3:37:23] Voice 9: a thousand dollars that it's gonna take to put this in the newspaper yeah

[3:37:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): if our if our staff

[3:37:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): are able to to find a workaround they sure will but as far as i know we have a standard requirement

[3:37:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): for our advertising that we have to follow for each local trust area right

[3:37:43] Voice 12: well that's the reality

[3:37:48] Voice 12: we're dealing with but I think that I think it's something for us to remember going forward that

[3:37:57] Voice 12: the legislation is what it is and when we are attempting to come up with a budget for a project

[3:38:02] Voice 12: like this and certainly when we enter the next budget cycle I think we have to be aware that

[3:38:08] Voice 12: that recruiting may be a thing that may have to happen more than once,

[3:38:14] Voice 12: and we just need to be mindful of what the real expenses are.

[3:38:19] Voice 12: But I have a question, which is,

[3:38:22] Voice 12: is there a qualification requirement for members to join APC?

[3:38:29] Voice 12: Because it's pretty clear there's all sorts of people

[3:38:34] Voice 12: who aren't necessarily residents of Gambier

[3:38:36] Voice 12: who are very interested in this process might be interested in joining advisory planning

[3:38:44] Voice 12: commission and in some sense especially some of the yacht club uh uh entities that actually are

[3:38:52] Voice 12: property owners they're in a sense they're going to be a resident so i'm curious like are there

[3:38:58] Voice 12: membership requirements or restrictions to be a member of the student i

[3:39:02] Voice 5: can answer that through

[3:39:03] Voice 5: the channel uh two-thirds of the members must be residents of a bigger local area

[3:39:08] Voice 10: got it thank you

[3:39:11] Voice 9: just to see stanford yeah it's full-time residents

[3:39:15] Voice 9: that's full-time

[3:39:17] Voice 5: residents the bile is written to say residents

[3:39:19] Voice 5: so

[3:39:20] Voice 10: that really

[3:39:24] Voice 9: given that 85 of our population's recognition yeah um this is where the big

[3:39:35] Voice 9: problems that I'm having, but I can discuss that in the new business.

[3:39:43] Trustee Patrick: Are you suggesting some language changes here, planners?

[3:39:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): Just a minor amendment to number six to acknowledge that there may be insufficient funds in the typical APC budget,

[3:39:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): so this will just give direction to staff to just continue with the advertising,

[3:40:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): do the work that needs to be done with the available money that exists.

[3:40:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): i

[3:40:08] Trustee Patrick: can read out what she suggested when you're ready okay so i'm gonna i'll read the motion

[3:40:13] Trustee Patrick: in its entirety so that uh i move that the gambier island local trust committee request staff to

[3:40:19] Trustee Patrick: advertise for expressions of interest for the vacant positions of the gambier advisory planning

[3:40:24] Trustee Patrick: commission the terms expiring october 17th 2025 so before i

[3:40:29] Voice 9: hand up yeah

[3:40:30] Trustee Patrick: there's more language

[3:40:32] Trustee Patrick: language there yet, and allocate necessary funds for advertising from the major budget.

[3:40:39] Voice 9: So the implication of the wording the way it is, is we're going to have to go and advertise

[3:40:43] Voice 9: for this again in October.

[3:40:45] Voice 9: Yeah, why are they expiring on it?

[3:40:47] Voice 9: Because that's two-year terms, but

[3:40:50] Voice 9: we didn't start until

[3:40:52] Voice 5: six months ago.

[3:40:55] Voice 5: The APC was appointed two years ago,

[3:40:59] Voice 9: or

[3:40:59] Voice 5: a year and a half ago.

[3:41:01] Voice 5: this

[3:41:01] Voice 9: is really screwy that's

[3:41:04] Voice 5: all right i need

[3:41:04] Voice 9: to use better language but we are going

[3:41:07] Voice 9: to spend a

[3:41:09] Voice 9: lot of money advertising and then we're going to have to do it again in october and we just

[3:41:14] Voice 9: don't have the money through

[3:41:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): the chair i can clarify that point if that's appropriate so

[3:41:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): the local trust committee can late summer august september direct staff to contact all members of

[3:41:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): the APC to determine which members are willing to have their terms extended for another year,

[3:41:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): for example, till the end of the project. And we've done this before. And then it's just

[3:41:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): self-identifying members are able to acknowledge that they would like to stay on formally in

[3:41:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): writing and that we can then get a resolution from the LTC to extend those appointments.

[3:41:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): There may be vacancies at which you may need to fill, but you can also, people can self-identify that they wish at any point in time, even if you don't have expression of interest, that they wish to sit on the APC.

[3:42:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): The local trust committee has the discretion to appoint members at any point.

[3:42:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): so if you've got a vacancy and you have people who are already standing in the sidelines that

[3:42:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): self-identifying they can submit something in writing to the office and you can just appoint

[3:42:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): those folks if once you've reviewed the materials in camera and you feel that they're qualified

[3:42:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): to support you because the whole point is that you are being supported in your deliberation

[3:42:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the draft bylaws or the community engagement summaries or whatever work okay

[3:42:38] Voice 9: i will

[3:42:40] Voice 9: the motion as read. Is there a second?

[3:42:44] Voice 12: Well, I have another question. I'm sorry.

[3:42:49] Voice 12: I may not have understood you the first time. I got confused the second time you're addressing

[3:42:55] Voice 12: this, but I understood that we have to advertise if there's a vacancy and they talked about

[3:43:00] Voice 12: appointments. So do we, if we hypothetically just skip the advertising thing, could we just

[3:43:08] Voice 12: appoint two people that we thought would be helpful not

[3:43:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): two people that you think would

[3:43:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): be helpful if there are individuals in the community that have self-identified as wanting to

[3:43:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): be appointed to the advisory planning commission and they've done so in writing to the local trust

[3:43:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): committee sometimes that does happen or people are saying i know you have an apc but i would

[3:43:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): really be interested in joining that and you have that you can consider that correspondence

[3:43:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): respondents uh in camera as an and decide whether or not you're willing to make appointments if

[3:43:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's space on your APC at this point in time I don't think that's the situation that you have

[3:43:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): I think you're looking for new people to self-identify and you have to do that through

[3:43:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): a call out through advertising but

[3:43:54] Voice 9: we have three people that didn't appoint the original APC and

[3:43:59] Voice 9: and they're still on our list.

[3:44:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay.

[3:44:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): So you could then request that staff contact those members

[3:44:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): or those individuals to determine whether or not they're still willing

[3:44:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): to be appointed to the Advisory Planning Commission.

[3:44:19] Voice 9: I mean, I'm just trying to think of this crazy budget scenario.

[3:44:23] Voice 9: The only problem is, and it cuts out people that have expressed interest

[3:44:27] Voice 9: in the day, what if something just happened?

[3:44:32] Voice 12: So

[3:44:32] Voice 9: it gets a bit weird.

[3:44:34] Voice 12: If I may, I understand where Trustee Stamford, I think I understand where Trustee Stamford's going with this.

[3:44:39] Voice 12: I'm sympathetic, but the interest that we heard today isn't going away.

[3:44:46] Voice 12: And I think we probably don't have a choice.

[3:44:50] Voice 12: We need to open it up, advertise, increase the pool of potential candidates to sit on the committee.

[3:44:58] Voice 12: and hopefully we'll get a lot of expressions of interest

[3:45:03] Voice 12: so that possibly in October, if people leave,

[3:45:08] Voice 12: maybe we can just skip the advertising

[3:45:10] Voice 12: and just go with the previous expressions of interest.

[3:45:13] Voice 12: So are

[3:45:13] Trustee Patrick: you seconding the motion then?

[3:45:15] Voice 12: Apparently I am.

[3:45:16] Trustee Patrick: So the motion's been seconded.

[3:45:18] Trustee Patrick: Any discussion?

[3:45:19] Trustee Patrick: No, we're done.

[3:45:20] Trustee Patrick: You're done discussing.

[3:45:21] Trustee Patrick: Then I'll call the vote.

[3:45:22] Trustee Patrick: All those in favor?

[3:45:23] Trustee Patrick: That also carries.

[3:45:25] Trustee Patrick: Oh, my goodness.

[3:45:26] Trustee Patrick: Is there any other actions you need from us

[3:45:28] Trustee Patrick: on this uh project at this time i think that was a record no all right

[3:45:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): that was it thank you so much

[3:45:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): bye-bye thank

[3:45:35] Trustee Patrick: you very much thank you sonia so love you it's like sorry all right we're moving

[3:45:43] Trustee Patrick: on to 10.2 minor project this is a verbal report who's giving that that would be

[3:45:49] Voice 5: you

[3:45:50] Voice 5: uh so this is just a update on the minor project uh so the keith shoreline minor project is not

[3:45:58] Voice 5: been adopted by the ltc yet the ocp bylaws ocp lub was approved by executive committee in december

[3:46:06] Voice 5: and the ocp bylaws currently with the minister as of january 2025 typically they will return

[3:46:13] Voice 5: to the ltc within three to six months at the meeting in november the ltc passed resolutions

[3:46:22] Voice 5: requesting that staff develop draft guidelines for development permit applications for additions to

[3:46:28] Voice 5: pre-existing dwellings in DPA 3 and then the LTC also requested that staff provide a report on

[3:46:34] Voice 5: options for DPA 3 guidelines related to qualified environmental professional requirements and the

[3:46:41] Voice 5: development approval information DAI bylaw guidelines for Keats Island. So those

[3:46:46] Voice 5: recommendations from November led to two potential minor projects the DAI bylaw project so the

[3:46:55] Voice 5: The purpose of this would be to enable the local trust committee to gather important information on the potential impacts of proposed activities for development.

[3:47:05] Voice 5: A DAI would ensure that the development aligns with the community standards and planning objectives, while also protecting the ecosystems.

[3:47:14] Voice 5: It could require applicants to submit specific information as part of their permit application, such as site plan, environmental impact assessment.

[3:47:24] Voice 5: For instance, if a development falls within a development permit area, the application

[3:47:31] Voice 5: would include a detailed report.

[3:47:33] Voice 5: This report would assess the potential environmental impacts and outline any necessary mitigation

[3:47:37] Voice 5: measures.

[3:47:38] Voice 5: So it really sets out what will be required of applicants so that that is really clear.

[3:47:45] Voice 5: So as part of the current major project, the AI by-law is currently in scope.

[3:47:51] Voice 5: So that could also extend to Keats Island, ensuring consistent environmental protection and community alignment across the entire Gambier Island local trust area.

[3:48:03] Voice 5: For the second project, which was considering development of additional guidelines for DPA3 on Keats Island.

[3:48:13] Voice 5: So this involves drafting guidelines that address the specific requirements and considerations for building additions to pre-existing dwellings within DPA 3.

[3:48:24] Voice 5: So amendments to this would follow once bylaws 153 and 154 are adopted, which is expected in the summer 2025.

[3:48:33] Voice 5: So that project wouldn't get started now.

[3:48:38] Voice 5: staff recommendation given the increased scope of the major project to include enhanced community

[3:48:45] Voice 5: engagement staff are recommending that the ltc does not pick up a minor project at this stage

[3:48:50] Voice 5: instead direct the island planner time to support the major project to help keep the ltc focused and

[3:48:57] Voice 5: increase the likelihood of completing the major project within this term the regional planning

[3:49:01] Voice 5: planning team would continue to support the project with assistance from the Island Planner so that's

[3:49:07] Voice 5: our recommendation at this time um I'm curious to hear what the LTC me too Christy Bernardo I don't

[3:49:18] Voice 12: want to be predictable um I don't think we needed we should have us one one size fits all DAI bylaw

[3:49:29] Voice 12: that applies to both Canes and Canberra. The reason I proposed guidelines back when the

[3:49:38] Voice 12: bylaws were passing, much to my unhappiness, was to provide some guidance to both staff and

[3:49:49] Voice 12: applicants on the very narrow issue of additions. I actually don't think it's particularly advisable

[3:49:58] Voice 12: to come up with a whole bunch of other language

[3:50:03] Voice 12: that ends up amending the meaning

[3:50:07] of what's in the amendments in the language bylaw

[3:50:11] that are not under consideration.

[3:50:12] Voice 12: So I would very much strongly suggest

[3:50:17] Voice 12: that we proceed in the direction

[3:50:18] Voice 12: of strictly those narrow guidelines

[3:50:22] Voice 12: with respect to additions.

[3:50:27] Voice 12: And with respect,

[3:50:29] Voice 12: fact uh i don't want us to wait until after the bylaws have passed because then what you have is

[3:50:36] Voice 12: this whole period of time where there's going to be somebody who's going to want to make some kind

[3:50:42] Voice 12: of application a permit to get something done within that development permit area and if it

[3:50:49] Voice 12: turns out to be in addition we don't have those guidelines in place that would be very helpful

[3:50:54] Voice 12: um you know we're talking about our limited ten thousand dollar budget that's just a start

[3:51:02] Voice 12: for anybody who wants to go through regulatory requirements and dealing with this and getting

[3:51:08] Voice 12: the right kind of plans and qualified professionals and all the other stuff that has to happen

[3:51:12] Voice 12: fine for development so from the start one of my objectives is to make things as straightforward

[3:51:21] Voice 12: forward as humanly possible for people who do have to find themselves in a situation having

[3:51:27] Voice 12: applied development permit. I think the guidelines, some of the guidelines that we've already developed

[3:51:34] Voice 12: are pretty good. They're pretty straightforward. They give a lot of room, I think, for people to

[3:51:40] Voice 12: understand what's going on. Some of the exemptions make a big difference. So I think we just need

[3:51:46] Voice 12: that little additional bit that bit about addition so I would favor us proceeding with that yes

[3:51:53] Voice 12: including as a minor project notwithstanding major project is underway and so I prefer that we go

[3:52:00] Voice 12: down that path and a question for Clive McCarter in January we amended I believe the OCP to include

[3:52:13] Voice 12: do we get the OCP bylaw to include one proposed by law 153 to deal with some language to make

[3:52:22] Voice 12: sure it properly covered off the First Nations reconciliation agreement that had been missing

[3:52:28] Voice 12: language before. Did that, I'm just curious, did that require, did that go back to executive

[3:52:34] Voice 5: committee? No, as the resolution from executive committee stated, it was given approval based

[3:52:40] based

[3:52:40] Voice 5: on the condition that we update the...

[3:52:43] Voice 5: Okay, right, yeah.

[3:52:44] Voice 5: Right, I've got it, thank you.

[3:52:46] Voice 12: So it's been in the hands of the province since January,

[3:52:50] Voice 12: and so as soon as we're gonna see that

[3:52:52] Voice 12: is the next regular meeting in CHIP,

[3:52:55] Voice 12: assuming they do what they usually do.

[3:52:59] Voice 10: Okay, thank you.

[3:53:02] Voice 11: Trustee Stamford?

[3:53:03] Voice 11: I

[3:53:10] Voice 9: feel this is a solution to the problem.

[3:53:15] Voice 9: I gotta get it out of terminology.

[3:53:21] Voice 9: This is the minor project, this minor project that has been the keep shoreline protection

[3:53:28] Voice 9: project.

[3:53:29] Voice 9: It's been a six-year process that turned into the major project and there were many cases

[3:53:36] Voice 9: where I felt the Gannier Island OCP project sat to the side of it and yes there were reasons

[3:53:46] Voice 9: that's around it but given the a minor project over so long i am concerned that this safety could

[3:53:54] Voice 9: happen if there are efficiencies that can be gained by doing process the same as for gambier

[3:54:02] Voice 9: um i think anywhere we can make our information our ocps our ballast uniform especially with

[3:54:13] Voice 9: I would really like to see that that's the avenue to go.

[3:54:19] Voice 9: I don't know how many people have asked for a development permit within the setback or

[3:54:27] Voice 9: will, and they've had a long time to do it.

[3:54:30] Voice 9: I'm not sure what the activity has been for the last six or ten years in that particular

[3:54:36] Voice 9: aspect.

[3:54:37] Voice 9: Maybe that's what I'd like to find is more data as to whether or not this really is a

[3:54:43] Voice 9: A problem and that people will be impacted by not having those this project advanced.

[3:54:53] Voice 9: Within the next few months, but it does

[3:54:55] Voice 9: fit in.

[3:54:58] Voice 9: So at this point, I can support somebody that's a project if it can be done more efficiently and.

[3:55:15] Voice 12: I'm going to

[3:55:15] Voice 12: quarrel with

[3:55:16] Voice 12: the use of the

[3:55:18] Voice 12: word it.

[3:55:20] Voice 12: There are two

[3:55:20] Voice 12: different it's

[3:55:21] Voice 12: that have been

[3:55:22] Voice 12: proposed.

[3:55:22] Voice 12: One is the

[3:55:23] Voice 12: DAI option.

[3:55:25] Voice 12: I don't want to

[3:55:27] Voice 12: end up in the

[3:55:27] Voice 12: same situation

[3:55:29] Voice 12: that we did

[3:55:30] Voice 12: with the

[3:55:30] Voice 12: Keats bylaws.

[3:55:31] Voice 12: Which is

[3:55:31] Voice 12: having to

[3:55:32] Voice 12: wrangle over

[3:55:33] Voice 12: things that

[3:55:33] Voice 12: are inappropriate

[3:55:37] Voice 12: and unhealthy.

[3:55:39] Voice 12: What may

[3:55:39] Voice 12: work for

[3:55:40] Voice 12: Gambier may

[3:55:41] Voice 12: not work for

[3:55:41] Voice 12: Keats.

[3:55:42] Voice 12: If it turns

[3:55:43] Voice 12: out you know i hear you trustee stanford that you know you're loathe to distract any energy with the

[3:55:49] Voice 12: gender project i get it if we have to wait for the guidelines i would rather wait than roll keys

[3:55:58] Voice 12: into the whatever's happening with the dampening the da just not interesting that simple and

[3:56:06] Voice 12: i don't want us to have to deal with the keats community you don't have to have this i don't

[3:56:14] Voice 12: want to repeat but to bring things to the kids community that they don't want so let's just drop

[3:56:22] Voice 12: it from and then although i'd rather we work on it now we'll wait till the bylaws come into force

[3:56:29] Voice 12: and maybe you're right maybe we ought to see how many applications we actually do get

[3:56:33] Voice 12: for additions and if it turns out that i've been advocating for a solution to a problem

[3:56:38] Voice 12: that we just then learn something well

[3:56:44] Voice 5: i was just going to say that by opening up the bylaws again

[3:56:49] Voice 5: the dpa again to amend it that is going back to the community that is opening it up again i

[3:56:57] Voice 12: appreciate that plan recording but it would be opening it up to give the community for once

[3:57:01] Voice 12: something they want so

[3:57:10] Voice 10: we're sitting here wait i

[3:57:13] Voice 12: i thank you for the report i think uh there's no

[3:57:17] Voice 12: need to move anything. I don't think we should personally I don't think we should proceed with

[3:57:24] Voice 12: either one of the recommendations today.

[3:57:28] Voice 10: Thank you

[3:57:29] Trustee Patrick: very much for your report. So we have one

[3:57:33] Trustee Patrick: piece of correspondence here. Email February 18th. Is there any action from the Sunshine Coast

[3:57:41] Trustee Patrick: regional district. Is there any

[3:57:43] Trustee Patrick: action on this?

[3:57:46] Voice 11: Thank you.

[3:57:48] Voice 9: No action?

[3:57:51] Voice 9: No, it's an update and

[3:57:54] Voice 9: anything

[3:57:55] Voice 9: just speaking

[3:57:57] Voice 9: from my

[3:57:58] Voice 9: position right now, anything that does

[3:58:02] Voice 9: come through on this project,

[3:58:03] Voice 9: make sure that

[3:58:05] Voice 9: trustees are made available.

[3:58:08] Voice 9: I'm assuming

[3:58:10] Voice 9: planners are

[3:58:12] Voice 9: are copied on everything, but I'll always connect everybody in this if it comes through

[3:58:17] Voice 9: to the directors. I do remind them that we're part of this project every time.

[3:58:23] Voice 9: Thank

[3:58:29] Trustee Patrick: you very much, then. We'll just receive it for information.

[3:58:32] Trustee Patrick: I

[3:58:32] Voice 12: do have a question about correspondence. We heard a representative of the Council of

[3:58:40] Voice 12: BC Yacht Clubs. I think that's what they're called. I recall we had received a letter

[3:58:46] Voice 12: from them it seemed very formal i'm just i don't want to discuss it or anything i'm just wondering

[3:58:52] Voice 12: why it's not on the agenda for

[3:58:54] Trustee Patrick: uh information because it was probably on the project website

[3:58:57] Trustee Patrick: page so i think staff by understanding staff policy generally when you have larger projects

[3:59:02] Trustee Patrick: like this it's just to put the information right onto the public website so it's publicly available

[3:59:06] Trustee Patrick: and uh you mean

[3:59:07] Voice 12: exactly what it says that i have underneath correspondence yeah yeah thank you for

[3:59:11] Voice 12: want to get it so it should be there and got it highly encouraging oh i'm glad i've seen it thank

[3:59:18] Voice 12: you super um

[3:59:19] Trustee Patrick: okay so onto new business 12.1 is the conversation about the advisory planning

[3:59:24] Trustee Patrick: commission trustee stanford that was yours just

[3:59:27] Voice 9: as carol walked out the door um i was reading the

[3:59:31] Voice 9: minutes of the abc and by in every sense of the word they'd be doing a huge amount of work trying

[3:59:38] Voice 9: trying to navigate through differing world views on where we should be going.

[3:59:44] Voice 9: But there was a line item, one of the APC minutes saying,

[3:59:49] Voice 9: or the end of the last APC minute saying,

[3:59:52] Voice 9: we do not feel supported by that trust.

[3:59:55] Voice 9: So I did go and ask a couple of APC members.

[4:00:00] Voice 9: man will sort of go nope

[4:00:01] Voice 15: she's just walking away that's fine

[4:00:06] Voice 9: and um basically it's just this sheer difficulty they're having trying to get together the fact

[4:00:15] Voice 9: they're having to do it in person they're doing it here they're doing it in northbound not doing

[4:00:20] Voice 9: it on the island um it means anybody that's full-time on the island can't attend so the

[4:00:28] Voice 9: focus of the information for voting purposes as being a certain part of the APC. The chair is a

[4:00:39] Voice 9: full-time member, but she can't vote because she's chairing the meeting, she's chairing it online.

[4:00:44] Voice 9: I cannot understate enough how difficult it is for GAM, your APC, this way. And I recognize we

[4:00:55] Voice 9: come through the legislation inside out trying to figure out a way around it um i almost want

[4:01:03] Voice 9: to go back to the group scenario where their words legislatively don't mean as much but that we have

[4:01:12] Voice 9: to meet and and and get feedback good feedback from a wider variety so i'm just really challenged

[4:01:24] Voice 9: by always helping. I used to be part of an APC. I know how frustrating it is to struggle with

[4:01:32] Voice 9: this particular issue. So anything we can do to support the APC. One of the things I would like

[4:01:42] Voice 9: to see is they don't meet quite as often. If that means they can switch meetings between the island

[4:01:53] Voice 9: and

[4:01:55] Voice 9: so they alternate

[4:01:57] Voice 9: because right now

[4:01:59] Voice 9: no full-time people

[4:02:01] Voice 9: can attend

[4:02:03] Voice 5: so go ahead

[4:02:05] Voice 5: so they set up their

[4:02:07] Voice 5: so they are free to do that

[4:02:10] Voice 9: but I think

[4:02:12] Voice 9: part of the difficulty is feeling that they're

[4:02:14] Voice 9: having to get the work done

[4:02:16] Voice 9: in a certain period of time and I totally

[4:02:18] Voice 9: get that

[4:02:18] Voice 9: I mean I should try and

[4:02:23] Voice 9: attend our meetings so that i can say don't relax it's gonna be okay um but it i it is tremendous

[4:02:33] Voice 9: what work they've done and i think that the next two projects are going to be equally hard

[4:02:40] Voice 9: so i i

[4:02:42] Voice 9: really hope that we can continue supporting but just so everyone's aware

[4:02:46] Voice 9: that's what that meant in the comment from NETS.

[4:02:53] Voice 9: I think they do want to have more materials to work with.

[4:02:59] Voice 9: Scientific background, I think they may want their decisions.

[4:03:02] Voice 9: I don't know how deliberate that is, but that's it.

[4:03:06] Voice 9: So this is more of a comment and a recognition within the public meeting

[4:03:13] Voice 9: about the challenges of apcs in this local trust area i'm not sure if it's unique but

[4:03:21] Trustee Patrick: it sure feels

[4:03:22] Trustee Patrick: well i mean i think it is true and i think this is some of our communications uh with the province

[4:03:29] Trustee Patrick: and as they look at the world they recognize that remote areas have challenges and that we

[4:03:36] Trustee Patrick: need more tools available to us to be able to to meet effectively i

[4:03:42] Voice 9: wonder how they do this

[4:03:43] Voice 9: this is the esquina area it's huge it's a quarter of the province how the apc meets up there i don't

[4:03:51] Voice 9: they

[4:03:51] Voice 12: don't have them so yeah maybe secret one but it depends whether it's a regional district

[4:03:56] Voice 12: or municipality whatever's happening yeah

[4:03:58] Voice 9: oh but although apcs for regional district can meet them

[4:04:06] Voice 9: well

[4:04:07] Voice 12: i i've got a question for steph which is i i'm aware that the consensus view or the

[4:04:13] Voice 12: interpretation or whatever the rule is and somehow you can't have online meetings you can't meet

[4:04:17] Voice 12: remotely with an apc it has to be in person and um trustee sanford mentioned a passing an

[4:04:26] Voice 12: alternative a group i infer but don't know that that is a reference to just doing an informal

[4:04:36] Voice 12: group of people who contributes views i wouldn't plan to come into some of those things i mean i

[4:04:43] Voice 12: i don't know enough about the apc structure but i i'd like to have a reference to the actual

[4:04:51] Voice 12: legislation uh and i'm hoping there might be some interpretation that might allow us to have

[4:04:59] Voice 12: meetings remotely by the way i've been assuming that the apc is subject to the open meeting rule

[4:05:04] Voice 12: as much as we are

[4:05:05] Voice 11: so

[4:05:06] Voice 12: uh is there any room for interpretation that allow us maybe to sort of

[4:05:14] Voice 12: convince ourselves a remote meeting is okay that works um and what about this alternative group

[4:05:22] Voice 12: idea having something more informal because at the end of the day what we what we need is whether

[4:05:28] Voice 12: it comes from the public at a meeting or the apc input you know we need more information

[4:05:35] Voice 12: different perspectives and those that we generate ourselves so

[4:05:38] Voice 12: So, Madam O'Connor, I've thrown a bunch of kind of loose ideas in.

[4:05:42] Voice 12: Perhaps you could call.

[4:05:46] Voice 5: So, we've done working groups before, and that provides a lot more flexibility because it's not legislated.

[4:05:52] Voice 5: So, you can put a call out to the community, have a more specific topic, and you could create a LUV OCP review working group, which we did for the KEEPS shoreline.

[4:06:04] Voice 5: So, that's an option.

[4:06:06] Voice 5: it's been my understanding and i've had talks with upper management that there just is no

[4:06:12] Voice 5: wiggle room in the legislation that islands trust specifically was left out when legislation was

[4:06:17] Voice 5: amended uh to allow for electronic abc meetings so while i think that the risk is quite low

[4:06:25] Voice 5: for the abc to meet electronically the legislation does not prevent well

[4:06:33] Voice 12: we're under obligation but

[4:06:34] Voice 12: you know risk is irrelevant we're under obligation of all the laws it is so but

[4:06:38] Voice 5: that's the rule

[4:06:39] Voice 5: yeah but apcs also set up their own meetings organize themselves oh

[4:06:45] Voice 12: wow so what they do up

[4:06:47] Voice 12: to their own devices there's kind of a relatively low risk there okay i guess

[4:06:54] Voice 12: well there's that option working group but

[4:07:01] Voice 9: uh how about we

[4:07:02] Voice 9: wait and see what kind of spots

[4:07:05] Trustee Patrick: working groups work well on a very specific task so if you have you know question on

[4:07:12] Trustee Patrick: one element of one of these guidelines then they you know they work really well

[4:07:19] Trustee Patrick: is that you can get the right people at the table to get into the weeds well

[4:07:26] Voice 12: i can certainly see if

[4:07:27] Voice 12: we put out a call for a working group on a specific topic called docs that we wouldn't

[4:07:34] Voice 12: have membership wrong if

[4:07:37] Voice 9: you're the working group on dock size composition yes um

[4:07:45] Voice 9: and that is an option we could do it that way too yeah um as well as an abc

[4:07:52] Voice 9: vehicle so legislatively the advantage of an abc for this particular process is it it does

[4:08:01] Voice 9: does give, add some weight to their minutes, they get support for minutes. We have a budget for them to do their meetings. Whereas as a group, it's more a system how we support them. So I think for now, I'd like to support, but I'm going to think about the idea of a group specifically for a certain aspect of this,

[4:08:26] Trustee Patrick: like I've done.

[4:08:27] Trustee Patrick: correct and a working group does well with this you know also a specific deliverable so yeah you

[4:08:32] Trustee Patrick: give them a specific task and you ask them to give you a report it's getting some minutes you've got

[4:08:38] Trustee Patrick: this report at the end of the day that you okay i'm gonna think about that all right so no further

[4:08:44] Trustee Patrick: action than on that one okay i believe we probably had uh manager dingman sitting in the wings here

[4:08:50] Trustee Patrick: for item 13.1 which is the bylaw enforcement notice uh amendment on page 71 of the agenda

[4:08:59] Trustee Patrick: ah somebody was sitting in the wings over to you good afternoon chair

[4:09:08] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: they try and get to the package here uh the local trust committee requested a uh

[4:09:14] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: port and draft a uh bylaw amendments for the bylaw enforcement notice bylaw uh so you've been

[4:09:22] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: It's been provided with a report that one has the recommendations to do three readings of a draft amendment bylaw.

[4:09:34] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: This report also has the statistical report as an attachment that was requested.

[4:09:42] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And to go through the attachment one and the statistical report regarding development permit areas or the files for any possible contravention of development permit areas, I provided two tables, one with the currently the only open file where we believe that a DPA is required.

[4:10:05] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And table two, I believe there are seven closed files where in the end, one, two, three, four, five development permits were required and five were issued.

[4:10:23] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: The other files in the end did not require a development permit.

[4:10:28] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: permit. So overall we are achieving success in any enforcement for development permit area

[4:10:35] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: contraventions but this was a snapshot of five years as requested and so there are previous files

[4:10:46] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: as an example involving development permit areas where it would have been useful for example to

[4:10:53] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: have a penalty or a fine for work within a development permit area without a permit

[4:10:58] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: and there has been uh for the again i don't believe in it's uh that i'm familiar since i've

[4:11:07] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: worked at island's trust and even before i'm not familiar with any legislation legislation any

[4:11:13] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: litigation that was undertaken for development permit area enforcement there's none that i can

[4:11:19] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: find on record uh so it hasn't uh nothing has come to the level of us requesting legal action

[4:11:28] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: from a local trust committee and so far the regular enforcement steps have been successful

[4:11:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: for the most part in obtaining and ensuring that property owners get their necessary permit

[4:11:39] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: applications in and getting their necessary permits so within the draft bylaw amend the

[4:11:48] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: bend bylaw you have revised schedules for each land use bylaw and i've simplified them

[4:11:57] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: uh really try to get it down to one page for each um uh land use bylaw each schedule

[4:12:06] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: so it's it's much simpler the the previous i think i lost track of how many pages the previous

[4:12:13] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: schedules were some places 20 pages uh which i don't think was necessary um but there is the uh

[4:12:23] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: There's a limited number of fine amounts for the different contraventions.

[4:12:27] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: We're working with fines between $300 and $500.

[4:12:30] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: $500 is the maximum.

[4:12:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So with the previous schedules, what was done is there were a lot of variations

[4:12:38] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: in the fine amounts for different contraventions.

[4:12:40] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: This standardizes them, and if the LTC wanted to go with more individual fines

[4:12:46] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: for specific contraventions, that would make the schedules longer and more complicated.

[4:12:51] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So in the end, I've provided those revisions to amend the land use bylaw, amend the schedules, land use bylaw contraventions.

[4:13:02] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And so for Gambier, you do have a penalty for failing to obtain development permit in a development permit area.

[4:13:11] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And also for Keats, which has development permit areas, the same thing.

[4:13:16] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Failure to obtain a development permit in any development permit area would have a $500 penalty.

[4:13:25] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And those, that's the basics of what's being presented here.

[4:13:31] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: The recommendations are that you give it three readings and then forward it to the executive committee.

[4:13:38] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: But of course, the LTC does have the option of requesting any changes, amendments in consideration of the fine, the penalty amounts, or in the end, if you do want to not proceed or, yeah, I guess if you do not want to proceed with having a fail to obtain permit in the development permit areas, you could amend that.

[4:14:02] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And Chair, I can take any questions if there are questions.

[4:14:05] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Are

[4:14:06] Trustee Patrick: there questions?

[4:14:08] Voice 9: Trustee Stamford.

[4:14:10] Voice 9: There's more comment.

[4:14:12] Voice 9: I note that

[4:14:15] Voice 9: the previous, the list

[4:14:17] Voice 9: of previous infractions are

[4:14:19] Voice 9: in a very specific area

[4:14:21] Voice 9: primarily on

[4:14:23] Voice 9: Gambier

[4:14:25] Voice 9: which is the area

[4:14:27] Voice 9: within Whispering Creek

[4:14:28] Voice 9: where I happen to live.

[4:14:31] Voice 9: So recognizing those

[4:14:33] Voice 9: challenges

[4:14:34] Voice 9: just um just off the bat this has helped clarify the need for uh including the vets bylaw with

[4:14:46] Voice 9: the dpas because it's been very hard to provide the right kind of education and support communities

[4:14:56] Voice 9: communities or community members

[4:14:59] Voice 9: to follow the the DPA.

[4:15:03] Voice 9: And if this is what it takes

[4:15:04] Voice 9: to to jog their memories,

[4:15:08] Voice 9: it is really important that we try and

[4:15:12] Voice 9: use the tools we have to protect these areas.

[4:15:16] Voice 9: The people that follow the rules

[4:15:18] Voice 9: have done fine, you know, it can be done.

[4:15:22] Voice 9: It it's just a group of people

[4:15:25] Voice 9: and landholders when they're

[4:15:28] Voice 9: they know or not um that just don't seem to be able to to make that connection with

[4:15:36] Voice 9: being on the closeness to uh wetlands and sensitive ecosystems so i would like to see this

[4:15:44] Voice 9: yeah

[4:15:46] Voice 11: i

[4:15:48] Voice 12: mean um it's a general point you get a provision you want to have a way of enforcing

[4:15:53] Voice 12: and theory you know i guess you know it certainly makes a certain amount of sense um although

[4:16:06] Voice 12: you know trustee stanford's words are still ringing in my mind for the last discussion but

[4:16:11] Voice 12: the solution in search of a problem i'm looking at what you have an attachment one here in terms of

[4:16:19] Voice 12: non-compliance over five years there's really only one file with any real non-compliance

[4:16:25] Voice 12: that's the one table one rest in due course was resolved but eventually people did get

[4:16:32] Voice 12: done so um i'm sensitive to the idea that you know what are we doing to really meet this

[4:16:41] Voice 12: which raises the question what is the current remedy available to us because i do recall

[4:16:48] Voice 12: an episode of the campaign that was difficult but what's the current remedy available to us now

[4:16:54] Voice 12: Now, if somebody should have applied for the development permit,

[4:16:56] Voice 12: and it turns out they're basically stringing us all on and not complying,

[4:17:01] Voice 12: it doesn't look like they're going to comply.

[4:17:03] Voice 12: What's the remedy that's available to us now?

[4:17:07] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So through the chair, it's litigation.

[4:17:10] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: That's your only remedy, is you have to go for legal action.

[4:17:15] Voice 12: Are you talking about litigation in Supreme Court?

[4:17:17] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Yes.

[4:17:18] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: We have to file a notice of claim of abuse for it.

[4:17:21] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: The province won't support us in prosecuting.

[4:17:23] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: You know, I don't think everything rises to the level of having to go to a notice of claim in BC Supreme Court, but the province will not support us or change legislation that will allow us to prosecute some of these offenders in provincial court.

[4:17:39] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So it becomes our only option.

[4:17:42] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And that is why I propose that in the end, the bend by law fine is your least costly option if you need it.

[4:17:49] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: It's only there if you need it.

[4:17:50] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: and really for all of the contraventions listed in these bend bylaws the great majority of them

[4:17:56] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: there's never going to be a violation notice issued they're there when you need them or we

[4:18:01] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: need them but the majority of tickets that are issued are for setback violations or short-term

[4:18:06] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: vacation rentals right

[4:18:10] Voice 12: and i mean i i draw some comfort in the fact that you've got these other

[4:18:15] Voice 12: files down here table two that arose and will result in due force by the issuance of dp

[4:18:20] Voice 12: eventually, so there's something there.

[4:18:22] Voice 9: Trustee Stamford. And just for context, the DPA that

[4:18:27] Voice 9: this lists, the fractions, I think that DPA-3 is only about five years old, so

[4:18:37] Voice 9: a long way to go on that one, and I also know the level of activity in that area and do not

[4:18:47] Voice 9: I think this is gonna stop anytime soon.

[4:18:51] Voice 9: So having even awareness,

[4:18:53] Voice 9: this is how people help mitigate the activity

[4:18:58] Voice 9: in that area.

[4:18:59] Voice 9: And it is a very sensitive part of the argument.

[4:19:03] Voice 9: Even for BPA3, it covers the whole of Gambier,

[4:19:09] Voice 9: but you can see where the activity is.

[4:19:13] Voice 9: Further questions or comments?

[4:19:15] Voice 9: How would you wish to proceed?

[4:19:16] Voice 9: so i would like to recommendations on page 71 so i'll begin with i move that the camera on the

[4:19:27] Voice 9: trust committee file number six zero site it's gambier trust committee by law enforcement

[4:19:32] Voice 9: notification by law 211 amendment 125 you read it first time so your second by trustee bernardo

[4:19:40] Voice 9: own discussion?

[4:19:42] Voice 12: I'm going to repeat the comment I made

[4:19:44] Voice 12: before. I think

[4:19:48] Voice 12: I certainly favor a light touch

[4:19:50] Voice 12: on enforcement and

[4:19:52] Voice 12: delivering a grant to obtain compliance

[4:19:54] Voice 12: short of having to take formal action.

[4:19:56] Voice 12: It certainly appears to be what we're doing

[4:19:58] Voice 12: here with well-deserved services.

[4:20:00] Voice 12: But the reality is

[4:20:02] Voice 12: if we're passing a bylaw of any kind,

[4:20:06] Voice 12: we need

[4:20:07] Voice 12: to have a way of enforcing it in extreme circumstances.

[4:20:10] Voice 12: So for that reason, I'm supporting

[4:20:11] Voice 12: the bylaw.

[4:20:11] Voice 12: on. We'll second

[4:20:13] Voice 12: again. We'll vote in favor.

[4:20:20] Trustee Patrick: We'll call vote then. All those in favor?

[4:20:22] Trustee Patrick: That carries.

[4:20:24] Trustee Patrick: You have to keep reading. I would go through

[4:20:26] Trustee Patrick: the Kabuki Theater part. Yeah.

[4:20:27] Voice 9: I move the Gambier-Arnold Local Trust Committee bylaw

[4:20:29] Voice 9: number 160, signage Gambier-Arnold

[4:20:31] Voice 9: Trust Committee bylaw enforcement notification

[4:20:33] Voice 9: bylaw 2011, amend number

[4:20:35] Voice 9: 125, second.

[4:20:37] Trustee Patrick: Is there a second? Second.

[4:20:39] Trustee Patrick: Cardinal Argo seconded. Any discussion?

[4:20:41] Trustee Patrick: All those in favor?

[4:20:44] Voice 9: Carried again. I move

[4:20:45] Voice 9: Move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[4:20:47] Voice 9: bylaw number 160 cited as Gambier Island

[4:20:49] Voice 9: Local Trust Committee bylaw enforcement

[4:20:51] Voice 9: notification bylaw 2011

[4:20:52] Voice 9: and number 125.

[4:20:55] Trustee Patrick: Second. Seconded by Trustee Bernardo.

[4:20:57] Trustee Patrick: Discussion? No. All those in favor?

[4:20:59] Trustee Patrick: Carried.

[4:21:00] Voice 9: I move that

[4:21:01] Voice 9: the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[4:21:03] Voice 9: number 160 cited as Gambier

[4:21:05] Voice 9: Local Trust Committee bylaw

[4:21:07] Voice 9: enforcement notification bylaw 2011

[4:21:09] Voice 9: and number 125

[4:21:11] Voice 9: be awarded to the Secretary

[4:21:13] Voice 9: of the Islands Trust for approval by

[4:21:15] Voice 9: second second

[4:21:17] Trustee Patrick: second by trustee bernardo discussion all those in favor that also carries

[4:21:21] Trustee Patrick: thank you very much manager dickman you're welcome

[4:21:27] Trustee Patrick: okay so that gets us we have a report

[4:21:32] Trustee Patrick: here from the trust conservancy highlight for your information at page 82 questions

[4:21:39] Trustee Patrick: any questions on the applications report which is 13.1 of page 84 questions there we have our

[4:21:48] Trustee Patrick: trustee uh local expense report that's here for your information uh adopted policies and standing

[4:21:55] Trustee Patrick: resolutions um first nation's relationship building says there's none i don't know if

[4:22:02] Trustee Patrick: anyone wishes to report anything and uh well

[4:22:06] Voice 12: uh forget it okay

[4:22:09] Trustee Patrick: sorry i

[4:22:10] Trustee Patrick: have your web page i think

[4:22:12] Trustee Patrick: we were talking about page material earlier so that brings us on to our active uh uh projects

[4:22:18] Trustee Patrick: list are there any changes that need to be made to that future projects list which i don't like

[4:22:27] Trustee Patrick: the name of

[4:22:28] Voice 11: don't

[4:22:31] Trustee Patrick: say it it's just the parking lot that's exactly what

[4:22:36] Trustee Patrick: it is all right with that i

[4:22:38] Trustee Patrick: think we've come to the end is there any further business that we're missing trustees no so the

[4:22:43] Trustee Patrick: next regular scheduled meeting is going to be june 24th at gambier community center uh gambier island

[4:22:51] Trustee Patrick: and keep forward to that so with that i guess we need a motion to adjourn

[4:22:56] Trustee Patrick: by uh trustee stanford exactly all right we're adjourned holy crap

[4:23:01] Voice 11: thank you very much

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 1 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
        Gambier Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Regular Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
March 25, 2025 
Delbrook Community Centre 
Oak Room 
851 West Queens Road 
North Vancouver, BC   V7N 4E3  
 
Members Present: Laura Patrick, Chair 
 Kate-Louise Stamford, Trustee 
 Joe Bernardo, Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Sonja Zupanec, Island Planner (electronic attendance) 
 Marlis McCargar, Island Planner 
 Bruce Belcher, Planner 2 (electronic attendance) 
 Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder 
  
Others Present: There were approximately 60 members of the public in 
attendance. 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
“Please note, the order of agenda items may be modified during the meeting. Times are 
provided for convenience only and are subject to change.” 
Chair Patrick called the meeting to order at 10:15 a.m. 
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
Chair Patrick acknowledged that the meeting was held on the territory of the Tsleil-
Waututh, Squamish, and Musqueam First Nations. 
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
By general consent, the agenda was approved as presented. 
4. REPORTS 
4.1 Trustee Reports 
Trustee Bernardo did not provide a report. 
 
Trustee Stamford reported the following: 
 Commended the work of the Advisory Planning Commission; 
 The Rural Economic Diversification and Infrastructure Program provided 
funding to the Community Association for livability and economic initiatives on 
Gambier Island; 
 Spoke with MLA Randene Neill and was informed that there are no 
discussions within the Ministry of Water, Lands, and Stewardship regarding 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 2 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
dock management plans in the Gambier or Howe Sound Átl’ka7tsem area; 
and 
 Will let the community know if, and where, a federal polling station will be 
located on Gambier. 
4.2 Chair's Report 
Chair Patrick reported the following: 
 Southern Gulf Islands MLA Rob Botterell is involved in dock management 
issues and concerns or questions can be directed to his staff; 
 Honoured to be elected Chair of Trust Council at the March quarterly 
meeting; and 
 Trust Council approved the annual budget. 
4.3 Electoral Area Director's Report 
Director Stamford reported the following: 
 The Regional District passed the annual budget and the tax requestion for 
Area F represents a 6% increase which is the equivalent of $3.00 per 
$100,000 of property value; 
 Priority focus of the Regional District includes water and solid waste and work 
is being done to create one Official Community Plan out of the existing seven 
regional plans; 
 Hopkins Landing dock repairs have been delayed until August due to the 
window of time that work is permitted in the marine area; and 
 Brigade Bay has been given the first FireSmart designation on the Sunshine 
Coast. 
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 
A member of the public opposed issuance of a Development Variance Permit for 570 
Vaucroft Road, Thormanby Island and stated the following: 
 Their family owns the neighbouring property and the negative impact of the variance 
approval will affect their privacy and enjoyment of their property; 
 There is concern that a generator will be located in the utility shed building located in 
close proximity to their home; 
 The setbacks are not consistent with the development pattern of other homes that 
are setback from the boardwalk; and 
 The boardwalk is a distinctive feature of the community and neighbourhood and the 
setback variance will alter the use of the space. 
Several members of the public, and representatives from the BC Council of Yacht Clubs, 
Burrard Yacht Club, Thunderbird Yacht Club, and Royal Vancouver Yacht Club spoke to 
the Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw Targeted Review and Advisory 
Planning Commission referral process and the following comments were noted: 
 A need for more, not less, public marine parks, private and public dock access, yacht 
clubs, lots, and housing on Gambier Island; 
 Suggestion that the Advisory Planning Commission does not represent a diversity of 
perspectives and there is a desire to broaden representation to provide a more 
meaningful engagement process; 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 3 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
 Many properties are only accessible by water, there is a lack of transparency in the 
process, flawed science has been used, and the timing of the meeting is not suitable 
for a public hearing; 
o A Trustee noted the meeting is a regular business meeting of the Local Trust 
Committee, not a public hearing, and that public engagement opportunities 
will be forthcoming as the project progresses; 
 Pleasure boaters are stewards of the environment, and yacht club members 
volunteer to ensure facilities are clean and safe and clear of invasive species; 
 Dock initiatives are concerning and there is a large focus on protecting eel grass 
when some residents believe there isn’t any present; 
 Suggestion that Gambier Island does not have eel grass; 
 Many are concerned about what happened to dock users and owners in Pender 
Harbour; however, local government was not part of that process; 
 Residents and dock users want to be part of the engagement process and require 
more information so they can provide input; 
 The Provincial government, through a renewed agreement with shíahálh swiya, has 
stepped back from the dock management plan and, at this point, they are allowing all 
existing docks to continue and have shifted to a twenty-five-year lease plan; 
 Concerns that the Official Community Plan review has been ongoing for ten years 
and there is a need to streamline the process; 
 The public engagement framework is supposed to be made up of interested parties; 
however, only two yacht clubs were included; 
 There has been minimal discussion supporting existing docks, there is concern 
replacement docks will need to be built using new standards instead of previous 
construction, and consideration of site-specific docks needs to be taken; 
 Private docks alleviate pressure on water taxi and public ferry use and reduce 
impacts on public infrastructure; 
 There are no sidewalks or roads, and if property owners don’t have docks, they can 
not access their property; 
 When bylaws are sent out for consideration, comparative bylaws are not provided 
and there is a pattern of non-transparency by a Local Trust Committee that does not 
understand the community; 
 The Local Trust Committee should allow the community the opportunity to connect 
and determine outcomes; and 
 There are concerns that what happened to dock users in Ladysmith and Pender 
Harbour will happen on Gambier. 
6. MINUTES 
6.1 Local Trust Committee Meeting dated January 28, 2025 - for adoption 
By general consent, the Local Trust Committee meeting minutes of 
January 28, 2025 were adopted. 
6.2 Section 26 Resolutions-Without-Meeting Report - none 
6.3 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes dated January 22, 2025 - for 
receipt 
6.4 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes dated February 5, 2025 - for 
receipt 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 4 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
6.5 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes dated February 26, 2025 - for 
receipt 
6.6 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes dated March 4, 2025 - for receipt 
6.7 Advisory Planning Commission Development Permit Area Guideline 
Recommendations - for receipt 
The Advisory Planning Commission Minutes dated January 22, February 5, and 
February 26, 2025 and Development Permit Area Guideline Recommendations 
were received for information. 
7. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES 
7.1 Follow-up Action List dated March 18, 2025 
The Planner provided an update on the status of items on the Follow Up Action 
List.  
8. DELEGATIONS - none 
9. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS 
9.1 PLDVP20250019 - 570 Vaucroft Rd., Thormanby Island - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
 The application seeks variance on highway and rear lot line setbacks; 
 The proposed building location was determined to be non-conforming at the 
time of building permit application; 
 Building plans include a proposed deck and utility shed; 
 The existing cabin will need to be decommissioned and used as an 
accessory building following construction of a new dwelling; and 
 Correspondence expressing opposition to the variance were received from 
four family members of one neighbouring property. 
 
The applicant’s representatives spoke to the application and the following 
comments were noted: 
 Their design department contacted Islands Trust regarding the placement of 
the dwelling building in relation to setback requirements and subsequently 
designed the home based on the information received; 
 When they applied for a building permit it was realized there was conflicting 
information and the setbacks did not conform; 
 The owners spent money in design and consultants based on incorrect 
information received;  
 The main setback in between properties is in conformance as are the building 
heights; and 
 The orientation of the building was designed in a way to maintain harmony 
with the cabin that has been on the property for a number of years. 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted: 
 The boardwalk is adjacent to the rear lot line of the property and the proposal 
is to vary the setback to 1.5 metres; 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 5 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
 The corner lot zoning requires a 6-metre setback from all highway lines which 
limits the building envelope; 
 The owners had indicated the planned use of the utility shed is for solar 
equipment; 
 Some of the neighbouring homes have also had setbacks to the boardwalk 
reduced; 
 The only public correspondence received was from the owners of the 
neighbouring property; 
 The applicant requested information on setbacks related to the relevant bylaw 
and they were provided lot line definitions; however, the zoning was not 
identified and the query did not come through a specific application; and 
 The building envelopes on this part of Thormanby are tight and there are 
other buildings within close setbacks of the road right of ways. 
 
GM-2025-004 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of PL-
DVP-2025-0019. 
CARRIED 
10. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS 
10.1 Major Project: Gambier Island Official Community Plan and Land Use 
Bylaw Targeted Review - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
 The report focusses on a draft Shore Development Permit Area to guide 
environmentally responsible shoreline development as a deliverable of the 
project charter; result of the engagement with the Squamish First Nation and 
outcome of community engagement; 
 The draft language represents and reflects the original recommendations of 
the Squamish First Nation and was reviewed by the Advisory Planning 
Commission; and 
 The project is not focussed on removing existing docks, but looks at new 
alterations and construction to the landscape and marine areas that could 
potentially be subject to regulations; 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted: 
 The role of the Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw differ from port 
authorities and provincial government discussions with First Nations and the 
Official Community plan recognizes that docks are a critical access point to 
Gambier Island; 
 Drafting bylaw language and engaging the community can be done in 
tandem; 
 The draft language is currently grounded in the implementation of First 
Nations recommendations and, if it is not supported by the LTC, a revised 
Project Charter will need to be considered; 
 There is preference to review and develop bylaw language prior to going to 
First Reading; 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 6 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
 Use of the term ‘endorsement’ is problematic as what is before the Local 
Trust Committee is suggested language for the approach of using a 
Development Permit and not bylaws that require endorsement; 
 The endorsement being asked is not for a general approach but a specific 
one and a draft proposal of actual amendments to the Official Community 
Plan should be provided first and then taken to the community to provide 
early opportunity for engagement and input; 
 The community should have opportunity for input about the general principles 
and visionary language of the Official Community Plan at the early stages as 
that is what shapes the specific bylaw language; 
 There is preference to take all of the large principles back to the Squamish 
First Nation at the same time; 
o The Planner noted the project is a targeted Official Community Plan 
Review, the Local Trust Committee endorsed the general concept of a 
shoreline Development Permit Area which was recommend by the 
Nation, the community engagement and is embedded in the Project 
Charter as an in-scope deliverable., Draft language has been 
prepared based on this, and the LTC requested staff prepare draft 
DPA language in October 2024; 
 The fundamental direction of the changes to the Gambier Land Use Bylaw 
should come from the community; 
 The vision statement that embeds the forthcoming regulation language needs 
to reflect the guiding principles of the importance of access to individual 
landholders and foreshore protections;  
o The Planner indicted the justification and objectives portion of the 
draft language of the Development Permit Area would be part of the 
Official Community Plan and broadening the justification and ensuring 
the objectives recognize the dependency of water access will 
strengthen the draft and subsequent renditions. 
 It is important that Squamish First Nation is aware that the language is 
preliminary and provisional on approval by the Local Trust Committee, and 
the community has not had opportunity to review it yet. 
 
The meeting was recessed for a break at 12:48 p.m. and reconvened at 1:20 p.m. 
 
GM-2025-005 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to re-engage 
with the Squamish Nation Rights and Title Department to review the draft 
shoreline development permit area language as attached in the staff 
report dated March 25, 2025 and provide the Local Trust Committee with 
any suggested amendments from the Nation for consideration prior to 
further public engagement.  
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-006 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to prepare a 
draft annotated shoreline development permit area document based on 
the language provided in March 25, 2025 staff report, including 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 7 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
recommended amendments by the Advisory Planning Commission; 
referral recommendations from Squamish Nation; draft Official 
Community Plan vision / policy language supporting shoreline protection 
and return to the Local Trust Committee for review and consideration of 
next steps. 
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-007 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to prepare a 
draft workplan and budget to implement recommendations the Advisory 
Planning Commission public engagement recommendations in 
Attachment 2 of the March 25, 2025 staff report for Advisory Planning 
Commission review and return for Local Trust Committee consideration 
as amended. 
CARRIED 
GM-2025-008 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
the motion be amended to insert the word “all” in between the words 
“implement” and “recommendations”. 
CARRIED 
GM-2025-009 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee endorse the amended 
Official Community Plan/Land Use Bylaw Review project charter v2.2.  
CARRIED 
 
Discussion ensued about legislated requirements of advertising for Advisory 
Planning Commission expressions of interest and options of appointing 
individuals to the Advisory Planning Commission through receipt of written 
correspondence in which a member of the public self identifies their interest. 
 
GM-2025-010 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to advertise 
for expressions of interest for the vacant positions on the Gambier 
Advisory Planning Commission with terms expiring October 17, 2025 and 
allocate necessary funds for advertising from the major project budget. 
CARRIED 
10.2 Minor Project: Local Trust Committee Project Prioritization - verbal update 
The Planner provided a verbal update and highlighted the following: 
 The Keats Shoreline Minor Project Bylaw was sent for Ministry approval in 
January, 2025 and is typically returned in three to six months for adoption by 
the Local Trust Committee; 
 At the November 2024 meeting, the Local Trust Committee requested staff 
develop draft guidelines for Development Permit Area (DPA) applications for 
building additions to pre-existing dwelling in DPA3, provide a report on 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 8 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
options to DPA3 guidelines related to qualified environmental professional 
requirements, and provide Development Approval Information (DAI) bylaw 
guidelines for Keats Island; and 
 Given the potentially expanded scope of the Major Project engagement 
process, staff recommends that the Local Trust Committee postpone work on 
a minor project at this time, to allow staff to concentrate resources on the 
Major Project. 
 
Discussion ensued and the Local Trust Committee chose not to proceed with a 
Minor Project at this time. 
11. CORRESPONDENCE 
(Correspondence received concerning current applications or projects is posted to the 
LTC webpage) 
11.1 Email dated February 18, 2025 from R. Shay, Sunshine Coast Regional 
District regarding Updates on Coast Flood Mapping Project 
Received for information. 
12. NEW BUSINESS 
12.1 Gambier Island Advisory Planning Commission - Trustee Stamford - Verbal 
Discussion 
A Trustee identified the ongoing issue of the legislative requirement that the 
Advisory Planning Commission meet in person. Discussion ensued regarding the 
merits of striking a working group. The Planner noted working groups provide 
more flexibility while the legislative advantage of an Advisory Planning 
Commission is the weight added to the minutes and budget provided to support 
meetings. 
13. STAFF REPORTS 
13.1 Bylaw Enforcement Notice Bylaw Amendment - Staff Report 
Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement Manager Dingman summarized the staff 
report and highlighted the following: 
 The Local Trust Committee requested a report on draft bylaw amendments 
for the Bylaw Enforcement Notice; 
 A statistical report outlining contraventions to the Development Permit Area 
Bylaw over the previous five years was summarized; and 
 The amended draft bylaw includes simplified and standardized fine 
schedules. 
 
Discussion ensued and it was noted that bylaws require a means of support 
through compliance measures and enforcement tools. 
 
GM-2025-011 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a first time.  
CARRIED 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 9 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
 
GM-2025-012 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
That the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a second time.  
                                                                                                                     
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-013 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a third time.   
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-014 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be forwarded to the Secretary of 
the Islands Trust for approval by the Executive Committee  
CARRIED 
13.2 Trust Conservancy Highlights of the February 11, 2025 Board Meeting 
  Received for information. 
13.3 Applications Report dated March 18, 2025 
Received for information. 
13.4 Trustee and Local Expense Report dated January, 2025 
Received for information. 
13.5 Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions 
Received for information. 
13.6 First Nations Relationship Building Update - none 
13.7 Local Trust Committee Webpage 
No updates required. 
14. WORK PROGRAM 
14.1 Active Projects Report dated March 18, 2025 
Received for information. 
14.2 Future Projects Report dated March 18, 2025 
Received for information. 
15. UPCOMING MEETINGS 
15.1 Next Regular Meeting Scheduled for Tuesday, June 24, 2025 11:00 am at 
Gambier Community Centre, Gambier Island, BC 
16. ADJOURNMENT 

ADOPTED 
 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 10 of 10 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
March 25, 2025 
By general consent, the meeting was adjourned at 2:38 p.m. 
 
 
_________________________ 
Laura Patrick, Chair 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder