South Pender Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, May 2, 2025

[0:00:14] Voice 16: You're all ready to go.

[0:00:16] Voice 18: It doesn't say live streaming on my end, but if we're ready to go.

[0:00:21] Voice 18: All right.

[0:00:23] Voice 18: Aisku Che'el, good day in Sinchothin to everybody gathered here today on Sudeas, South Pender.

[0:00:32] Voice 18: Thank you for coming to this regular business meeting of the South Pender Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:38] Voice 18: This area, Sudeas, is now known as South Pender Island.

[0:00:42] Voice 18: Island, but this has been home to the Wissanich peoples, Central Coast Salish peoples, and

[0:00:48] Voice 18: the Tsintchatlan speaking peoples since time immemorial.

[0:00:52] Voice 18: We always want to begin by respectfully acknowledging that the land and waters on which we gather

[0:00:57] Voice 18: is within the traditional territory of the Wissanich Coast Salish peoples.

[0:01:03] Voice 18: I'll start with introductions of our local trust committee and then to staff.

[0:01:07] Voice 18: my name is uh trustee toby elliott i hail from uh nanamook territory on gabriela island although

[0:01:17] Voice 18: i'm in nanaimo proper here today unable to join you in person because of very silly car troubles

[0:01:25] Voice 18: i just could not get the vehicle on the road so my apologies for not being there in person

[0:01:32] Voice 18: and thank you to staff and everyone who did a lot of workarounds to get the equipment there

[0:01:38] Voice 18: so that we could live stream today. We are joined, of course, by your local trustees,

[0:01:44] Voice 18: Trustee Dag Falk and Trustee Christina Evans. Do you want to say anything or any words of welcome?

[0:01:53] Voice 10: Welcome, everyone.

[0:01:57] Trustee Evans: And hello, thank you for everyone for showing up today. Really good to

[0:02:01] Voice 18: see everyone's faces again.

[0:02:03] Voice 18: Thank you. And now seeing staff members in the room, we've got Planner Kim Stockdale. Hello. And joined for the first time today by Planner Bruce Belcher. Hello.

[0:02:16] Voice 18: He's joining us as a planner too and has been, I understand, making the tour of some of the islands to learn how our planning works out on the ground.

[0:02:26] Voice 18: So welcome to this local trust committee meeting and hope you enjoy your first time with the South Bender LTC.

[0:02:33] Voice 18: In the background, we have staff Lisa Millard managing our meeting.

[0:02:36] Voice 18: And I'll just note that the live streaming, we appear to have a problem and that's being troubleshooted.

[0:02:43] Voice 18: So hopefully we can get that going.

[0:02:47] Voice 18: And with that, I'll look to approve or amend the agenda.

[0:02:51] Voice 18: agenda. Are there any changes or amendments to the agenda? If not, we'll adopt it by general

[0:02:57] Voice 18: consent. Yes, Chair, Trustee Evans.

[0:03:01] Trustee Evans: I'd like to add a new business item to initiate discussion

[0:03:06] Trustee Evans: of our next project. Just a comment on new business if we can.

[0:03:12] Voice 18: Sure. So we'll add 17.2

[0:03:20] Voice 18: um next project discussion anything else to add to the agenda no okay i'll take it by general

[0:03:33] Voice 18: consent that the agenda be adopted as amended okay so we'll turn to trustees uh for your reports who

[0:03:42] Voice 18: would like to go first i

[0:03:45] Voice 10: don't have a report okay

[0:03:47] Trustee Evans: um so from myself um with regards to the dip and

[0:03:53] Trustee Evans: the bridge it looks like both of these projects are progressing as anticipated it looks like the

[0:03:58] Trustee Evans: work will be concluding uh with a june completion date hopefully that doesn't get pushed any further

[0:04:05] Trustee Evans: so that's very exciting oh that'd be good um with regards to those some of the committees that i'm

[0:04:13] Trustee Evans: on we've had a cao performance evaluation policy committee meetings on april 7th so we've had

[0:04:20] Trustee Evans: further discussion on the performance evaluation policy with staff and an external consultant.

[0:04:28] Trustee Evans: With regards to the Trust Programs Committee, Trust Council handed back the Trust Policy

[0:04:38] Trustee Evans: Statement draft work to this committee. We've met three times for the fourth meeting next week.

[0:04:51] Trustee Evans: So we've gone through the changes and between the Committee of the Whole and Trust programs,

[0:05:01] Trustee Evans: we've had quite an extensive look through, first look through of the policy statement

[0:05:08] Trustee Evans: and we're just initiating a second pass.

[0:05:12] Trustee Evans: So this should be ready to go to Committee of the Whole at the end of the month

[0:05:16] Trustee Evans: and then on for first reading at the June Trust Council meeting,

[0:05:20] Trustee Evans: after which it will be coming back to communities and referrals for a six-month period so we'll

[0:05:28] Trustee Evans: have an opportunity as a community to take a good look at it and provide feedback. The other thing

[0:05:35] Trustee Evans: that we did in trust programs is we made a decision on the secretariat services to the

[0:05:40] Trustee Evans: coordination groups and trust areas so we had some monies go to the rural island economic partnership

[0:05:47] Trustee Evans: the coordination of the Bains Sound Lambert Channel Ecosystem Forum

[0:05:52] Trustee Evans: and the Coastal Douglas for Conservation Partnership

[0:05:56] Trustee Evans: as well as the Alkitsam Al Sound Community Forum

[0:05:59] Trustee Evans: and the Southern Gulf Islands Forum

[0:06:02] Trustee Evans: I think that's all that I have to report out on committee work

[0:06:09] Trustee Evans: for the last couple of months

[0:06:12] Trustee Evans: actually this is really just last month

[0:06:14] Trustee Evans: um yeah i think that's it for me for now thank

[0:06:22] Voice 18: you trustee evans um okay so for my

[0:06:26] Voice 18: chair's report um there has been quite a lot of work in the in the background um

[0:06:34] Voice 18: i'll just touch on a few forums that happened uh i attended the rural island economic partnership

[0:06:41] Voice 18: Forum, March 6th to 7th. And there was quite a lot of discussion, early discussion on the

[0:06:49] Voice 18: impacts of tariffs and trade. And well, that seems to be dominating a lot of the talk as

[0:06:57] Voice 18: well as at UBCM, sorry, AVICC, the Association of Vancouver Island Coastal Communities held

[0:07:03] Voice 18: their annual convention uh april 12th to 14th in nanaimo and there was a presentation by ubcm

[0:07:12] Voice 18: president trish mandeo um basically on the impacts of the trade war and that they've commissioned

[0:07:21] Voice 18: and an economics sort of data trends monitoring group

[0:07:31] Voice 18: to understand the potential impacts for BC.

[0:07:36] Voice 18: So that's a really interesting report that's on UBCM's website.

[0:07:41] Voice 18: I can share it if anybody's interested.

[0:07:44] Voice 18: And then another joint meeting just Wednesday,

[0:07:48] Voice 18: Wednesday, Bowen Island Municipal Council

[0:07:52] Voice 18: met with the Executive Committee of Islands Trust

[0:07:55] Voice 18: for our annual joint protocol meeting.

[0:07:58] Voice 18: We actually met on Bowen Island

[0:08:00] Voice 18: in their brand new community facility.

[0:08:04] Voice 18: Absolutely a beautiful building

[0:08:06] Voice 18: that I believe it's been worked on

[0:08:08] Voice 18: for about five or six years and just completed

[0:08:11] Voice 18: and they just moved in.

[0:08:12] Voice 18: So their municipal chambers are there

[0:08:14] Voice 18: and it was wonderful to tour the place

[0:08:17] Voice 18: lace and see some very special places on bowen we discussed the policy statement um update the

[0:08:24] Voice 18: conservancy and the request of the province that was on the agenda from the islands trust side

[0:08:30] Voice 18: and uh bowen island municipality shared updates from their strategic plan and that they're entering

[0:08:37] Voice 18: an ocp review so it was a really really good meeting i think both sides learned a lot and

[0:08:44] Voice 18: And I have a lot of respect for how their council works through their work plan.

[0:08:50] Voice 18: And I encourage everyone to take a look at Bowen Island's strategic plan.

[0:08:54] Voice 18: It's really structured well.

[0:08:57] Voice 18: And they said they had a goal from the beginning of what can we accomplish, what's feasible in their term.

[0:09:03] Voice 18: And they seem to be working through those actions at good speed.

[0:09:10] Voice 18: bead um a bit of an update from avicc there there was a there will be a report coming out to

[0:09:17] Voice 18: trustees um but i did a presentation as part of a community housing solutions panel so we were one

[0:09:25] Voice 18: of three presenters and this um our presentation was on the results of the tiny house on wheels

[0:09:32] Voice 18: Enablement Project in the trust area. And so I presented along with two planners from the

[0:09:40] Voice 18: Regional District of Nanaimo, who were part of the technical panel that the Islands Trust funded to

[0:09:47] Voice 18: bring together, Building Inspector and Planning Manager, and then Director Vanessa Craig. It was

[0:09:52] Voice 18: was a really good, exciting presentation, if I do say so myself, but mostly because

[0:10:01] Voice 18: the building inspection officials were quite excited about the outcomes of the meeting

[0:10:10] Voice 18: in which they discovered that the tiny home industry has gotten very close with their

[0:10:17] Voice 18: manufactured mh models to the bc building code and they can actually permit them issue a building

[0:10:24] Voice 18: permit for these new tiny homes on wheels so that opens up a lot of possibilities for um

[0:10:34] Voice 18: new builds it doesn't and then we actually talked about policy options for existing

[0:10:39] Voice 18: tiny homes on wheels or ones built to the rv standard so that was quite exciting and

[0:10:44] Voice 18: And there's been several local area directors asking for the report.

[0:10:49] Voice 18: So we'll see more coming out of that.

[0:10:52] Voice 18: And the steering committee chaired by Trustee Boland, we're going to have a report reviewed at Regional Planning Committee next Friday.

[0:11:01] Voice 18: So more work on tiny homes.

[0:11:04] Voice 18: As you know, this has been one of my advocacy projects for a long time.

[0:11:10] Voice 18: I think I'll leave it there.

[0:11:15] Voice 18: trust council I think we reported out on trust council yes we have since March yeah so let's

[0:11:26] Voice 18: turn to our agenda and we don't have an electoral area director's report unless Paul is in the room

[0:11:34] Voice 18: okay so we'll open the meeting for town hall and questions so this is the opportunity for

[0:11:43] Voice 18: community members who are not applicants. Applicants will have a chance to speak to

[0:11:49] Voice 18: their application at the time when we get to it on the agenda, so you can save your comments for

[0:11:58] Voice 18: then. But if you have any other comments you wish to make on the items on the agenda, the work plan,

[0:12:06] Voice 18: the LEB amendment project, or anything else of interest that you need your trustees and local

[0:12:12] Voice 18: trust committee to know please uh now is your time to speak keep your comments respectful

[0:12:19] Voice 18: to the issues and not personalities and um you

[0:12:25] Voice 9: want us to assist you in

[0:12:27] Voice 18: the room yes

[0:12:30] Voice 18: and i see planner stockdale thank

[0:12:33] Voice 17: you chair elliott um i would imagine there could be the

[0:12:36] Voice 17: potential for questions regarding the tup um i'm just wondering in process would that be an

[0:12:43] Voice 17: opportunity for trustee evans to step out or is it okay for her to be here during that question time

[0:12:51] Voice 18: it would be good uh i think for trustee evans can stay there and just not answer

[0:12:59] Voice 18: any questions i mean you could declare now that as you're an applicant you'll be considering those

[0:13:05] Voice 18: those questions or comments as an applicant, not as a trustee. I don't think it would

[0:13:12] Voice 18: perjure a process if she stays in the room. Thank you. Trustee Evans?

[0:13:17] Trustee Evans: Sorry, I might have

[0:13:18] Trustee Evans: misheard you or misunderstood. I thought you just asked that any questions regarding the TUP

[0:13:22] Trustee Evans: application be held until we reach that point in the agenda. Did I mishear that?

[0:13:28] Voice 18: From the LTC, questions from the LTC to the applicant,

[0:13:34] Voice 18: comments from the community on the application can be heard now.

[0:13:40] Voice 18: Gotcha, thank you.

[0:13:42] Trustee Evans: So

[0:13:42] Voice 18: yes, if you and Dag want to facilitate that and recognize people from the floor,

[0:13:48] Voice 18: I could even turn over the chairing to one of you just to make it easier. Yes, Trustee Evans?

[0:13:54] Voice 18: So

[0:13:54] Trustee Evans: I will at this point recuse myself from that process. Any questions regarding the application to the LTC, I will not be able to answer.

[0:14:04] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Evans.

[0:14:06] Voice 10: Well, I'm happy to share this section.

[0:14:09] Voice 10: That

[0:14:10] Voice 18: would be great.

[0:14:10] Voice 18: I'll do the speaker's list.

[0:14:13] Voice 10: I

[0:14:13] Voice 22: think I'll be fine.

[0:14:15] Voice 22: Okay.

[0:14:15] Voice 22: I just wanted Kim to clarify, and I'm quite sure this is true.

[0:14:21] Voice 22: I've read at least one letter questioning the recreational vehicle 90-day limit with regard to

[0:14:30] Voice 22: business use I'm quite you know in agreement that that should not be used for

[0:14:37] Voice 22: anything like that it was I think all was intended for family but I'd like you to clarify that this

[0:14:43] Voice 22: is not anything new in bylaw 129 all this was was a housekeeping thing that I brought up quite

[0:14:50] Voice 22: quite some time ago, because in that point,

[0:14:55] Voice 22: I can't remember what it was, but it was misplaced.

[0:14:58] Voice 22: It should have been its own point.

[0:15:01] Voice 22: It had nothing to do with staying in an accessory building

[0:15:07] Voice 22: or something while you're building.

[0:15:09] Voice 22: This was supposed to be separate, and you clarified that.

[0:15:12] Voice 22: So just for the record, I think that should be clarified.

[0:15:15] Voice 22: This has nothing to do with 129.

[0:15:18] Voice 17: So through the chair, you're absolutely right.

[0:15:20] Voice 17: the amendments included in this bylaw are just technical in nature the intent uh the use is not

[0:15:27] Voice 17: changing by any means it's just moving around the section so it's easily to interpret it's for

[0:15:33] Voice 17: clarity that's right um

[0:15:39] Voice 10: can i remind everyone please state your name at the beginning so that

[0:15:43] Voice 10: the people online can also hear sure um

[0:15:46] Voice 20: i have to start with the question if i have something to say

[0:15:49] Voice 20: about um bylaw 122 and your

[0:15:52] Voice 10: name oh

[0:15:54] Voice 20: sorry anthony lewis l-o-u-i-s would this be the place where i

[0:16:02] Voice 20: would say that sorry what is this the place where i would have to be able to say comments about

[0:16:08] Voice 20: bylaw 122 as opposed to bylaw 129

[0:16:13] Voice 10: absolutely yeah any topic you want to speak about so um

[0:16:17] Voice 20: So I hope to do this, excuse me, without looking at my phone.

[0:16:21] Voice 20: But basically, I think that bylaw 122 is a really strong, robust, workable bylaw, which protects the homeowner and minimizes the impact on the environment and also has a variance built in.

[0:16:37] Voice 20: So that if it doesn't, if a homeowner can't work within that, there is an option.

[0:16:43] Voice 20: in the last in bylaw proposed bylaw 129 to me represents a step backward because there has to

[0:16:52] Voice 20: be greater impact upon the environment with an

[0:16:55] Voice 20: increase of maximum floor level size and 500

[0:16:58] Voice 20: square feet and also too with the siting and the floor level changes that reduces the privacy

[0:17:07] Voice 20: and thus rural rural qualities so in the last meeting on the 27th um trustee uh toby elliott

[0:17:17] Voice 20: said that what did she say the goal of the trust was to minimize impact on the environment

[0:17:25] Voice 20: something that i say that's the gist of it something i endorse a hundred percent and if

[0:17:32] Voice 20: If we compare the two, 122 and proposed 129, 122 is working, it minimizes the impact upon

[0:17:42] Voice 20: the environment, and it supports the official community plan.

[0:17:46] Voice 20: Whereas draft proposal 129, in my opinion, moves us, with increased host size and siting,

[0:17:55] Voice 20: moves us toward urban values, and we need to resist this.

[0:18:00] Voice 20: And that's where I need to just look at this. Our South Pender community is committed to preserve the rural nature and natural diversity of our island environment for future generations.

[0:18:11] Voice 20: And we're going to be judged on our actions. We don't want

[0:18:15] Voice 20: to be accused of paying lip service to minimizing the impact on the environment.

[0:18:21] Voice 20: The existing by-law, I feel, should be maintained in perpetuity because it's working and it's minimal impact on the environment.

[0:18:31] Voice 20: Thank you.

[0:18:42] Voice 3: That's Jane Perch. I'd like to speak to two different issues.

[0:18:46] Voice 3: One, in terms of what might become the next project as this current one is hopefully coming to an end soon.

[0:18:57] Voice 3: there's been an issue paused because of a change that was never in principle with respect to the

[0:19:02] Voice 3: government actual when the bylaws were amended under the previous trustees the issue I'm talking

[0:19:07] Voice 3: to relates to short-term vacation rentals so the bylaw was changed to no longer allow

[0:19:15] Voice 3: short-term rentals outright and has always been for numerous numerous years and in its place is

[0:19:23] Voice 3: a requirement for a temporary use permit but those of us who have been operating for many

[0:19:28] Voice 3: years under the existing bylaw when that happened I was opposed to that change but

[0:19:34] Voice 3: nonetheless I was confident that as we were told that we would be protected that that use would

[0:19:41] Voice 3: could be able to continue under through the provisions of the local government act but

[0:19:45] Voice 3: But to our surprise, a few years into our change in bylaw, the provincial government changed the Local Government Act to specifically exclude short-term rentals from that protection.

[0:19:59] Voice 3: So we are now left in a bit of a limbo.

[0:20:02] Voice 3: I know the Trust Committee has created a standing resolution to ensure that no action is taken against those of us who are operating until such time as you revisit.

[0:20:15] Voice 3: bylaw that created that change and i'm hoping uh that that will be your next uh priority as that is

[0:20:22] Voice 3: uh it needs to be uh you can't we can't stand uh and operate under a standing resolution forever

[0:20:28] Voice 3: and i'm hoping that in your term that will be your next priority as it is causing us a great

[0:20:34] Voice 3: concern for those of us in that position and i talked to for not only for myself but others who

[0:20:39] Voice 3: we've been talking to wondering how this is going to be resolved so i'm hoping that'll be your

[0:20:45] Voice 3: next priority um and and the second issue is talking to the proposed changes to the land use

[0:20:52] Voice 3: pilot um i um a great amount of effort has gone into this term again this is you know we're going

[0:21:00] Voice 3: on how many years in terms of our land use bylaw and we're back again you know discussing it and

[0:21:07] Voice 3: and as what's being proposed so far i you know i would like to go back to where we were

[0:21:12] Voice 3: but I can recognize that there's been some compromises made and I support those compromises

[0:21:19] Voice 3: and I think we are well on our way to having some changes and I'm hoping that the changes

[0:21:26] Voice 3: especially that relate to those of us who are specifically affected by the previous

[0:21:30] Voice 3: bylaw 122 changes they seem to be being addressed the concerns about those of us who

[0:21:36] Voice 3: made non-conforming in in in various areas with respect to setbacks from the sea with respect to

[0:21:42] Voice 3: setback site setbacks house size changes and those of us and many of us have already completed our

[0:21:50] Voice 3: developments and we've operated under those guidelines and there is still the fear of us

[0:21:54] Voice 3: becoming non-conforming and i the changes that are being proposed that will specifically

[0:22:00] Voice 3: allow i don't want to be reliant on the local government act because i can see what's happened

[0:22:04] Voice 3: with the local government act because we could become uh maybe not permitted um we i've never

[0:22:11] Voice 3: seen the local government act ever change the way it was for short-term rental so that is my fear

[0:22:15] Voice 3: and i'm hoping the wording that you have in the by proposed changes that are done uh gives us that

[0:22:20] Voice 3: protection and and discussing prior to when the bylaw came into place and protecting those of us

[0:22:26] Voice 3: who built under those those legislate those uh bylaws versus what's in place now so thanks for

[0:22:33] Voice 3: them thank you for your comments yeah

[0:22:37] Voice 10: thank you wonder um if we could get some clarity from staff

[0:22:43] Voice 10: on um whether this uh stdr um changes that we or discussion or what you know having a look at that

[0:22:54] Voice 10: and seeing what we can do does that necessarily fall into a minor project yes it

[0:23:01] Voice 10: would we cannot

[0:23:02] Voice 4: And

[0:23:02] Voice 10: I'll do that in some other...

[0:23:04] Voice 4: No.

[0:23:05] Voice 4: No.

[0:23:05] Voice 10: Yeah.

[0:23:05] Voice 10: Thank you.

[0:23:11] Voice 15: Okay.

[0:23:12] Voice 22: Yes.

[0:23:13] Voice 15: Do I

[0:23:13] Voice 22: get a second?

[0:23:14] Voice 22: I just want to do...

[0:23:17] Voice 22: Do you want to state your name?

[0:23:18] Voice 22: Oh, sorry.

[0:23:18] Voice 22: Heather, how are you?

[0:23:19] Voice 22: You can put that on my first comment.

[0:23:21] Voice 22: Yeah.

[0:23:22] Voice 10: I did.

[0:23:24] Voice 10: Okay.

[0:23:25] Voice 22: I just want to restate what I've stated in letters, but other people are talking about

[0:23:30] Voice 22: what they've stated in letters, so I think I can do this as well.

[0:23:34] Voice 22: that in regard to um 10 foot interior setbacks every other island except for from my count my

[0:23:43] Voice 22: look at the different bylaws has 10 except for hornby has 10 foot interior setbacks the only

[0:23:53] Voice 22: one that would be different is galliano island but their rural residential category is different

[0:23:59] Voice 22: than our rural residential category and is much more rural in the way that it's it's um written

[0:24:05] Voice 22: i can't remember i think it's in the ocp anyway um for us to now be stating that or for people

[0:24:13] Voice 22: to now be stating that um we are losing privacy because of this the privacy was always in place as

[0:24:22] Voice 22: 10 feet it i don't think that anybody needs to have anything more than 10 feet to put shrubbery

[0:24:28] Voice 22: or fences or window treatments and in those places it's um it seems to have taken off as a

[0:24:36] Voice 22: something that has always been here even a former trustee uh mentioned that it was always 20 feet

[0:24:43] Voice 22: well it was not always 20 feet it was always 10 feet from what i understood and it was rural there

[0:24:49] Voice 22: are a couple of properties who have built their homes very close to the property line some closer

[0:24:56] Voice 22: than 10 feet that may be effective but the property owners on the other sides

[0:25:02] Voice 22: of them should not have to have to conform to what those people have done

[0:25:08] Voice 22: you know there are trees there are shrubs there are fences there are window

[0:25:13] Voice 22: treatments that can hopefully solve these issues so I just want to restate

[0:25:19] Voice 22: that as far as rural character I don't think it it really is why I don't know

[0:25:24] Voice 22: why we have to be in our cap for the first one to be to be going the other way so that's um

[0:25:34] Voice 22: something i just wanted to state again thank you thank

[0:25:39] Voice 15: you yes hi

[0:25:42] Voice 7: paul um i've had an opportunity

[0:25:46] Voice 7: over the last two years to share my views and in letters and in meetings and and so i'll be

[0:25:52] Voice 7: brief here i don't want to repeat a lot of that stuff but um i've shared my views about the

[0:26:00] reduced side lot setback uh and the increased house size allowance and how in my view it erodes

[0:26:08] our communities excuse me our community's ocp goals the goals of

[0:26:15] Voice 7: maintaining our community's

[0:26:16] Voice 7: rural character protecting our natural environment especially sensitive ecosystems along the foreshore

[0:26:23] maintaining a sense of privacy and I do believe that the existing bylaw does protect privacy

[0:26:32] Voice 7: where possible reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the key one here is ensuring that growth

[0:26:41] Voice 7: is gradual and sustainable and the house size changes really accelerate have the potential

[0:26:49] Voice 7: for accelerating that growth. Our current bylaw protects these important goals and to move to

[0:26:59] bylaw 129 I believe erodes those goals to some extent and I have not heard evidence that there's

[0:27:11] Voice 7: been any specific problems identified by the current bylaw with respect to house size and

[0:27:17] citing. There have been two variances that were

[0:27:20] Voice 7: approved and went through without great

[0:27:25] difficulties

[0:27:26] Voice 7: so that situations of special circumstances can be addressed under this

[0:27:33] bylaw. I know there's been a lot of back and forth debate about so-called legal non-conforming.

[0:27:40] conforming. Our staff have repeatedly pointed out that our current bylaw does not create

[0:27:51] any legal

[0:27:52] Voice 7: non-conforming situations with respect to house size or siting. Senator Elliott at

[0:27:59] Voice 7: the last meeting called the concerns about legal non-conforming a misapprehension. I

[0:28:08] Voice 7: I agree, yet this misapprehension has been used as the smokescreen to fuel this two-year exercise

[0:28:17] Voice 7: in increasing house size allowance and reducing setbacks.

[0:28:22] Voice 7: To date, trustees have not directly addressed how the impact of increased house size

[0:28:32] and reduced setbacks will weaken our OCP goals or enhance those goals.

[0:28:40] We just have not had clear reasons

[0:28:43] Voice 7: from the trustees on that.

[0:28:45] Voice 7: So I hope today that trustees will provide a clear rationale for changing our current bylaw.

[0:28:52] Voice 7: There have been no specific problems identified, as I mentioned earlier, that require correction.

[0:28:58] Voice 7: I believe trustees have a duty to provide clear and compelling reasons why our tax dollars are devoted mostly to this review of the current bylaw.

[0:29:07] Voice 7: well. So I look forward to hearing your reasons today. Thank you.

[0:29:20] Voice 15: Whoa, good.

[0:29:24] Voice 19: One, two, three.

[0:29:27] Voice 6: Okay. Okay, Rick Friesen, South Bender Island. I'm one of the ones that was quite

[0:29:33] Voice 6: happy to go back to 114 in its entirety. Most of what you see around you on Bender Island is a

[0:29:40] Voice 6: result of decisions made under the provisions of bylaw 114. I was unhappy with bylaw 122 and the

[0:29:50] Voice 6: extremes in my opinion that it went to and I'm very happy with 129 that keeps the baby of 120.

[0:30:00] Voice 6: a lot of setback things that I agree with, but also makes an adjustment so people with

[0:30:07] Voice 6: existing properties that they built under 114 can preserve their legal status. So I'm quite happy to

[0:30:15] Voice 6: go ahead with bylaw 129. The proponents of 122, I would just have to say, take the win. It's not

[0:30:22] Voice 6: all gone. But some of the more egregious things that the rest of the community could not agree

[0:30:27] Voice 6: with have been rolled back a bit. It's not a win for either side. It's just sort of a compromise

[0:30:35] Voice 6: down the middle. In the last election, we came in within a hairbreadth of getting a very different

[0:30:42] Voice 6: form of government, which I firmly believe would not have valued Ireland's trust in the conservation

[0:30:49] Voice 6: as highly as the previous governments. And if they do, or if a change of government does happen,

[0:30:57] Voice 6: and they see a house divided on South Tender

[0:31:00] Voice 6: with factions fighting over basically what comes down

[0:31:06] Voice 6: to just numbers, we're all conservationists here.

[0:31:09] Voice 6: We're just trying to decide where do we put the needle.

[0:31:12] Voice 6: Then I think it weakens us, and I've seen many examples

[0:31:18] Voice 6: when you get a divided jurisdiction that can't reach a decision,

[0:31:23] Voice 6: the government will then go in and appoint someone to take care of the problem.

[0:31:30] Voice 6: I'd like us to get along. I'd like us to come up with a compromise that we can all live with.

[0:31:36] Voice 6: It's not everything that we wanted. I want one thing, other people want others.

[0:31:42] Voice 6: But if we don't pull together on this, we might have someone come in to take it all away from us.

[0:31:47] Voice 6: was

[0:32:00] Voice 20: it somebody else i just wanted to say to kevin's comments no

[0:32:04] Trustee Evans: sorry uh there is there

[0:32:06] Trustee Evans: you can only discuss things directly with us though if you want to have a side conversation

[0:32:11] Trustee Evans: after the meeting

[0:32:13] Voice 20: we

[0:32:14] Trustee Evans: know we don't we don't speak to other people's no we're not doing dialogue

[0:32:18] Trustee Evans: but

[0:32:19] Voice 20: i can address the idea of the 10-foot setback if

[0:32:24] Trustee Evans: you're making a response to another person's

[0:32:26] Trustee Evans: comment no

[0:32:26] Voice 20: okay thank you are

[0:32:36] Voice 10: you sure that's correct that doesn't feel right to me

[0:32:38] Trustee Evans: if she's

[0:32:40] Trustee Evans: making if she's making a response directly to another another member of the public's comment

[0:32:49] Voice 19: but you can't respond to

[0:32:51] Voice 19: her comments i

[0:32:53] Voice 20: won't refer to firstly i just wanted to say that my

[0:32:57] Voice 18: My

[0:32:57] Voice 20: family's been on South Pender since 1953, and I'm sure there were probably 10-foot setbacks then, but it didn't matter.

[0:33:05] Voice 20: The lots were large, the houses were small, they were far apart, and I never, ever, ever felt threatened or invaded by a neighbor until, in the 90s, a very large place was...

[0:33:19] Trustee Evans: I'm going to caution here that we don't get into areas of identifiable people.

[0:33:24] Trustee Evans: large

[0:33:26] Voice 20: houses appeared which in brain hit imposed upon the privacy right and so i think that the 20

[0:33:36] Voice 20: foot setback speaks to current conditions in a way that we need to we need to act on that we need to

[0:33:45] Voice 20: preserve the rural aspect and it it didn't used to be such a problem when there was less population

[0:33:52] Voice 20: and when there were smaller houses, when there were bigger lots.

[0:33:55] Voice 20: But it is now.

[0:33:56] Voice 20: I think it's critical to retain it to that region.

[0:34:00] Voice 14: Thank you.

[0:34:03] Voice 14: Thank you.

[0:34:05] Voice 20: I'm learning.

[0:34:06] Voice 20: I

[0:34:07] Voice 10: just want to clarify that I think that we do respond to each other's input.

[0:34:12] Voice 10: And we can't say that we don't.

[0:34:13] Voice 10: We had three hands go up after a speaker.

[0:34:16] Voice 10: Clearly, that was triggered by that.

[0:34:19] Voice 10: So we can't be too rigid here.

[0:34:21] Voice 4: Right.

[0:34:22] Voice 4: but it can't be a direct response to what the previous speaker has said yes

[0:34:27] Voice 10: okay we had somebody

[0:34:30] Voice 10: yeah um in

[0:34:34] Voice 8: the name excuse me oh gordy duncan um i see that the as a member of the apc i was

[0:34:53] Voice 8: I'm negligent in that I don't know what the previous expense budget for APC was for, but

[0:35:00] Voice 8: I hope to get, I find that a very large number, unless it's for all five meetings.

[0:35:06] Voice 8: So I would like some clarification on that, because I know my stipend is either still

[0:35:12] Voice 8: still pending. And as with respect to 129, I support the moves, assuming that there is

[0:35:33] Voice 8: a clear exception clause, for lack of a better term, to ensure and to protect a lot of the

[0:35:40] Voice 8: concerns that have been expressed in the room over time excuse me over time so but it is time to move

[0:35:47] Voice 8: on so thank you and

[0:35:50] Trustee Evans: i maybe ask staff to be on the expense i think i understand where they came

[0:35:55] Trustee Evans: from and how they seem to be but i'd like to yeah

[0:35:57] Voice 17: so the expense would be from the minute taker

[0:35:59] Voice 17: and i'd imagine the minute taker instead of submitting the expense one by one it was

[0:36:03] Voice 17: grouped together so that's where the expense would come from yeah thank you

[0:36:12] Voice 10: I was just wondering, exception laws? I wasn't clear on what you were meaning with that.

[0:36:19] Voice 8: Well, with respect to the bylaw dwelling sizes, there's two facets, and I think quite often it gets confused.

[0:36:28] Voice 8: The one facet is the addition of 500 square foot to all property sizes.

[0:36:34] Voice 8: The second thing is what I'm describing as the exception clause, which in essence removes those houses that were made non-conform by 1.82, removed from non-conformity and makes them conforming by the fact that they're recognized in the existing bylaw.

[0:37:00] Voice 8: the wording of the proposed one is a little confusing to me but at least it I think it does

[0:37:08] Voice 8: accomplish the uh or does protect those existing dwellings from non-conformity nothing to do with

[0:37:17] Voice 8: legal non-conformity

[0:37:19] Voice 10: okay just want to make sure we capture that point before we get to that

[0:37:23] Voice 10: discussion but if you want so

[0:37:24] Voice 17: point of clarity and through the chair uh just to confirm that

[0:37:28] Voice 17: that dwellings in terms of floor area, by the adoption of 122, there was no non-conformity.

[0:37:37] Voice 17: So the dwellings are conforming, and even the amendments to 129, it's the same thing.

[0:37:42] Voice 17: So I just want to make sure there was never an issue of when the bylaw 122 was adopted,

[0:37:48] Voice 17: the only aspect that put certain dwellings in non-conformity was in relation to height.

[0:37:55] Voice 17: It wasn't in relation to floor area.

[0:37:58] Voice 17: I just want to make that point.

[0:38:02] Voice 11: All right.

[0:38:04] Voice 21: Thanks very much.

[0:38:05] Voice 21: I'm Dallas Balding, South Kender.

[0:38:07] Voice 21: So a couple of points.

[0:38:10] Voice 21: Bylaw 114 was drafted and adopted according to the OCP that currently exists.

[0:38:18] Voice 21: So stating that any new bylaws are not, you know, challenge that OCP,

[0:38:26] Voice 21: I think we need to recognize that the OCP has been around for a long time

[0:38:31] Voice 21: and it's I don't I don't think it's fair to say that new bylaws challenge that OCP when it was

[0:38:39] Voice 21: the original bylaw conditions were adopted under the same OCP first point second point

[0:38:49] Voice 21: you know we're experiencing some controversy over side setbacks and these are I think are

[0:38:58] Voice 21: are mostly related to lot sizes.

[0:39:00] Voice 21: And for this reason, I think it is important to understand

[0:39:05] Voice 21: that the lot sizes where these controversies or challenges

[0:39:08] Voice 21: are being most realized are those

[0:39:15] Voice 21: that will never happen again.

[0:39:17] Voice 21: They were simply done under a subdivision criteria that

[0:39:22] Voice 21: That allowed long, skinny lots, and the people who monitored that and approved that are now on record as saying that will not happen again.

[0:39:35] Voice 21: So if there are areas that require special considerations, I would encourage the people who live in that area to seek those special considerations for themselves in their own area.

[0:39:50] Voice 21: I support 129. I am a member of the APC. And I also believe that we have come to an appropriate compromise. I don't see any difference in allowing, you know, in requiring a house to be 20 feet away from a lot line when you can build a 1500 square foot utility building 10 feet away from the lot line.

[0:40:12] Voice 21: and your kids can go out and practice their rock and roll music

[0:40:16] Voice 21: or somebody can have a forge or whatever it is.

[0:40:20] Voice 21: So the idea that you are imposing on your next door neighbor

[0:40:24] Voice 21: because your house is closer,

[0:40:25] Voice 21: but you've got a 15 square foot utility building

[0:40:29] Voice 21: with windows and lights on because you're growing inside

[0:40:33] Voice 21: just doesn't make sense.

[0:40:36] Voice 21: Thanks very much.

[0:40:38] Voice 15: Thank you.

[0:40:41] Voice 15: all right are we

[0:40:43] Voice 10: not

[0:40:44] Voice 7: quite done okay not quite uh i just want to support and reinforce um what

[0:40:50] said earlier um

[0:40:54] Voice 7: this is a point i'm not commenting anything so please let me speak

[0:41:03] Trustee Evans: I'm very careful that we're not doing a direct comment.

[0:41:06] Trustee Evans: I'm very careful, thank you.

[0:41:10] Voice 7: Several people have asked me about the effect of the three provisions for house size floor

[0:41:21] allowance and how to interpret them.

[0:41:23] And some of the questions

[0:41:25] Voice 7: I wasn't able to answer.

[0:41:26] Voice 7: One of the questions was, so if somebody had a 1.5-acre lot and they currently have a 4,500-square-foot house on that lot, they can build to 4,500 square feet.

[0:41:49] Does that make that rebuild nonconforming with the bylaw?

[0:41:56] And I said, it's hard for me to answer that question because I can't quite sort that out.

[0:42:02] I

[0:42:02] Voice 7: find the wording very confusing, and I'm not sure how that all shakes down.

[0:42:08] Voice 7: It would be really helpful if examples had been provided for that so that we could understand it better.

[0:42:16] Voice 7: I try to understand these things.

[0:42:19] Voice 7: When I first looked at the handwritten chart in the meeting, I interpreted it different than it turns out to be interpreted.

[0:42:27] Voice 7: And I went, I took the heading to be the main feature and then the sub things, clarification of the main feature where it's just the opposite.

[0:42:39] Voice 7: C is the main feature in that provision.

[0:42:42] Voice 7: So anyway, that's just my confusion.

[0:42:45] Voice 7: But others have shared that confusion.

[0:42:48] Voice 7: So I think clarity is really important for something that we've been spending two years working on.

[0:42:54] Voice 7: And if people don't understand quite where we're at yet, it's important that we get that clarity.

[0:43:00] Voice 7: Thank you.

[0:43:01] Voice 15: Thank you very much.

[0:43:06] Voice 10: Kim, did you want to respond at all?

[0:43:09] Voice 10: I'm going to get to our discussion.

[0:43:11] Voice 10: Okay.

[0:43:13] Voice 21: Just the point of clarity.

[0:43:15] Voice 21: We've been working on this for 10 years, not two years.

[0:43:24] Voice 10: okay looks

[0:43:25] Voice 4: like it's going

[0:43:27] Voice 10: on it's going twice

[0:43:28] Voice 4: okay

[0:43:29] Voice 10: i'll hand this back to you

[0:43:31] Voice 10: toby thank

[0:43:35] Voice 18: you uh for stepping in there trustees that was very helpful um i'm just going to pause

[0:43:42] Voice 18: for a minute before we move with the the rest of our meeting the live streaming looks like it's on

[0:43:48] Voice 18: but it apparently is not so what I'd like to do is ask if we can take a

[0:43:56] Voice 18: five-minute recess and unplug things and plug them back in and see if we can get

[0:44:03] Voice 18: the live streaming on because it it we're going to have to do some

[0:44:08] Voice 18: alternate arrangements to get the applicants to join us because people are

[0:44:12] Voice 18: are not able to watch. So if we

[0:44:14] Voice 10: can put a five

[0:44:15] Voice 18: minute... What

[0:44:16] Voice 10: do you need to plug in? Do we need

[0:44:18] Voice 10: to plug or unplug something? We're going

[0:44:19] Voice 18: to try to restart the chair laptop because we're just

[0:44:25] Voice 18: we're troubleshooting. Lisa said that everything in the background looks like it's working so we

[0:44:31] Voice 18: think it's an on-site issue. So we might just try to shut down the chair laptop and turn it on again.

[0:44:37] Voice 18: Again, Lisa, do you have any new information there?

[0:44:40] Voice 16: The applicants, the electronic aspect of the meeting is working.

[0:44:44] Voice 16: The live stream isn't.

[0:44:46] Voice 16: So all that means is that people cannot click the watch live button and see the meeting from home.

[0:44:51] Voice 16: People can join the meeting electronically.

[0:44:54] Voice 16: We do have applicants in the waiting room.

[0:44:57] Voice 16: But there is something wrong with the watch live aspect.

[0:45:03] Voice 18: Do you think and you don't think we have the wrong link for this chair laptop?

[0:45:08] Voice 16: all of the links have been checked for the chair laptop that's in the room

[0:45:12] Voice 16: and everything in the background applications is accurate so

[0:45:19] Voice 18: do we want to take a break and

[0:45:21] Voice 18: try to troubleshoot this yep i'll reboot this and

[0:45:26] Voice 17: i'm wondering lisa in the meantime are you

[0:45:28] Voice 17: able to put something on our on the website just so people are aware that the live stream is not

[0:45:33] Voice 17: working or perhaps let's troubleshoot if it's still not working then we'll post something on

[0:45:37] Voice 17: the website planner

[0:45:38] Voice 16: stockdale something has been on the website since the beginning of the meeting

[0:45:42] Voice 16: oh good

[0:45:42] Voice 16: okay thank you

[0:45:44] Voice 18: thanks on it all right we are on it just seems a day for technology so

[0:45:50] Voice 18: let's take a five minute recess and come back at uh 11 23. great thank you thanks

[0:48:58] Voice 17: i'm just gonna mute us right now so you don't hear the chitter chatter

[0:49:03] Voice 18: thank you it's funny the camera's not reorienting there but uh they

[0:49:19] Voice 16: might have moved it and they

[0:49:20] Voice 16: they just need to they

[0:49:24] Voice 18: get focuses on movement so it won't be that corner of the room so live

[0:49:30] Voice 18: streaming still not working hey i

[0:49:32] Voice 16: don't know i haven't restarted it yet do you think they're

[0:49:35] Voice 16: ready oh

[0:49:37] Voice 18: oh so we have to start the meeting or oh restart the lives let's test it and then if

[0:49:43] Voice 18: we need to troubleshoot some more sure thanks i'm

[0:50:08] Voice 15: just checking we

[0:50:22] Voice 16: got it yay

[0:50:23] Voice 18: okay excellent

[0:50:26] Voice 18: Excellent.

[0:50:27] Voice 16: I'll update the website with the button again and recording the recording started at the beginning of the meeting, the zoom so we'll still

[0:50:36] Voice 16: have a full, full recording to post to the website.

[0:50:41] Voice 18: Perfect. Thank you, Lisa.

[0:50:46] Voice 18: Kim. Oh, yeah. Can you rotate the camera just a little bit.

[0:50:50] Voice 18: we

[0:50:51] Voice 20: oh yes okay

[0:50:53] Voice 20: just

[0:50:55] Voice 18: uh move yeah exactly there you go

[0:50:59] Voice 18: and it looks like

[0:51:01] Voice 18: our live streaming is working so thank you lisa

[0:51:03] Voice 19: if everyone

[0:51:27] Voice 18: wants to come back around i'm missing the cookies are you all having cookies

[0:51:42] Voice 18: Kim, if you could unmute the chair kit now.

[0:52:30] Voice 19: All right.

[0:52:31] Voice 18: Let's return to our meeting, everyone. I'm sorry that was a short break, but we'll have

[0:52:38] Voice 18: a longer break. We're going

[0:52:42] Voice 17: to start the meeting, everyone. Thank you.

[0:52:47] Voice 18: Thank you. Let's recall to

[0:52:51] Voice 18: to order uh we are now in section nine minutes and um so we're looking or we're receiving the

[0:52:58] Voice 18: minutes of the local trust committee special meeting dated march 7th 2024 for information

[0:53:05] Voice 18: and we're looking to adopt the minutes of april 7th and april 26th trustees are there any changes

[0:53:12] Voice 18: or clarifications for those minutes yes planner stockdale i

[0:53:17] Voice 17: believe you're referring to something

[0:53:18] Voice 17: thing else so the minutes are 10 and they are march 27 2025 nine oh

[0:53:27] Voice 17: my gosh i'm looking at

[0:53:28] Voice 18: i'm looking at a may 10 2024 i looked up an old agenda for the uh

[0:53:32] Voice 18: for the s i would that's the

[0:53:35] Voice 18: that's where the stvr report is i'm so sorry um okay let's get back on track

[0:53:40] Voice 18: come on

[0:53:41] Voice 18: sheepers i was so i'm

[0:53:44] Voice 20: the one who's tired well you

[0:53:47] Voice 9: did we resolve too many

[0:53:49] Voice 18: things open okay so we're looking yes so the live streaming is working now

[0:53:54] Voice 18: and people can view it so thank you for that pause it worked so march 27 2025 minutes for

[0:54:01] Voice 18: adoption page four to eight any changes or amendments or questions nothing for me nothing

[0:54:09] Voice 12: Okay.

[0:54:11] Voice 18: I'll take it by general consent that the minutes of March 27th, 2025 be adopted.

[0:54:16] Voice 18: And we'll move into our follow-up action list dated April 2025. Any questions or updates from

[0:54:23] Voice 18: the planner? Yes, Planner Stockdale.

[0:54:26] Voice 17: Thank you, Chair. Just one update with the item from August

[0:54:31] Voice 17: 1st, 2023. I did contact the applicant and it is still in progress. So I just wanted to provide

[0:54:39] Voice 17: that update to the LTC. And I will put pressure on them to see if they can complete that in the

[0:54:46] Voice 17: next month or two.

[0:54:50] Voice 18: Thank you. Trustee Evans?

[0:54:52] Trustee Evans: I have a question for staff on the same topic.

[0:54:55] Trustee Evans: Is there a time period where this expires?

[0:55:01] Voice 17: No, it does not. No. The only thing that

[0:55:03] Voice 17: potentially could expire, this is in relation to a subdivision. So it'd be Ministry of Transportation

[0:55:09] Voice 17: and transit they generally ish their preliminary layout agreements for a certain number of years

[0:55:16] Voice 17: so that would be through mott but i believe that's been renewing us as

[0:55:19] Voice 19: they go thank you

[0:55:24] Voice 18: for that

[0:55:27] Voice 18: okay well let's get into our um applications and referrals section 14 our first application

[0:55:36] Voice 18: point pl dvp 2025 0 1 2 0 and uh thank you bruce for being in attendance planner belcher if you

[0:55:47] Voice 18: want to introduce this application and lisa if you want to promote the applicants to

[0:55:54] Voice 18: be able to address the local trust committee that'd be great if they're here

[0:55:59] Voice 16: which applicant

[0:56:00] Voice 16: am i promoting kim and dave or kyle um

[0:56:05] Voice 18: kim and dave or kyle could you raise your hand if you are

[0:56:11] Voice 18: speaking to the hoyt application or bruce maybe you know which ones are the landowners

[0:56:18] Voice 1: uh kyle is the applicant and dave is the owner okay

[0:56:25] Voice 17: so kyle and dave it sounds like

[0:56:27] Voice 17: you great thank

[0:56:30] Voice 18: you welcome Kyle and Kim and Dave good

[0:56:34] Voice 6: morning good

[0:56:35] Voice 18: morning so you'll have a chance

[0:56:38] Voice 18: to speak to your application the planner will introduce it and then trustees can ask if they

[0:56:44] Voice 18: have any questions and so I'll turn it over to you planner Belcher thank

[0:56:51] Voice 1: you yes this is a new

[0:56:54] Voice 1: development variance permit application for 9921 boundary pass drive and the variance would relax

[0:57:03] Voice 1: the natural boundary setback for an existing dwelling and a new patio they would also relax

[0:57:09] Voice 1: the setback to the front lot line for an existing garage the application was made to bring the

[0:57:16] Voice 1: existing non-conforming portion of the house into compliance prior to applying for a building permit

[0:57:22] Voice 1: for an addition and a new patio.

[0:57:27] Voice 1: The proposed addition to the house would not extend further into the setback

[0:57:31] Voice 1: and the new patio is located within the 15-meter setback,

[0:57:36] Voice 1: but mostly located where a previous deck existed

[0:57:39] Voice 1: and in a previously disturbed portion of the property.

[0:57:45] Voice 1: The existing garage was added to the application

[0:57:48] Voice 1: to bring it into compliance with the current bylaw.

[0:57:50] Voice 1: both the existing garage and dwelling likely have pre-existing non-conforming status as they were

[0:57:58] Voice 1: constructed in around 1970 and probably predate the 1972 CRD bylaw however since it's difficult

[0:58:06] Voice 1: to prove this the variance would provide more certainty and bring these into compliance

[0:58:11] Voice 1: for the future no formal letters were received during the correspondence period we received one

[0:58:19] Voice 1: phone call from a neighbor in support. Staff consider that the rationale is reasonable and

[0:58:25] Voice 1: the anticipated new impacts are minimal. The siting presents no new hazards to the natural

[0:58:31] Voice 1: boundary and the new development involves limited development of undisturbed areas of the property.

[0:58:39] Voice 1: Based on all this, staff recommend that the South Bender Island Local Trust Committee

[0:58:43] Voice 1: committee approve issuance of file PL-DDP-2025-0120. Thanks.

[0:58:54] Voice 18: Thank you, Planner Belcher. Hello, Kyle and Dave, or Mr. Nielsen. Would you like to speak

[0:59:02] Voice 18: to your application? And thank you for your letter attached there.

[0:59:07] Voice 2: Sure. Yeah, just to kind of reiterate what Bruce was saying. Basically, we're just dealing

[0:59:14] Voice 2: with some setback variances or an existing building location that is

[0:59:18] Voice 2: already non-conforming. We're not essentially moving any closer to any of

[0:59:27] Voice 2: the lot lines and all of the new building area is within the allowable

[0:59:35] Voice 2: setback areas. So one thing I wanted to mention as well is that we have had

[0:59:40] Voice 2: had structural and geotech do a preliminary review and they're both supportive of the

[0:59:45] Voice 2: application as well i'm just looking at a couple of things here so yeah to speak to the garage a

[0:59:55] Voice 2: bit um i mean that that setback variance for the existing

[1:00:00] Voice 2: non-conforming building that was really only triggered just because of the fact

[1:00:04] Voice 2: there's some addition work being done on the house but as far as the existing

[1:00:10] Voice 2: portion of the building that is on the waterfront side that will all remain the

[1:00:18] Voice 2: existing foundation will remain so nothing else will be disturbed there

[1:00:22] Voice 2: other than the renovation to that portion and I actually think it would be

[1:00:27] Voice 2: better from an environmental perspective as opposed to demolishing that whole building

[1:00:31] Voice 2: within that setback as well um as opposed to building something totally new on the lot so

[1:00:38] Voice 2: um yeah but i think i think bruce covered most of it fairly well so right

[1:00:48] Voice 18: great thank you um

[1:00:50] Voice 18: to the land uh holders wish to speak to their application no and you don't

[1:00:58] Voice 22: have to oh yes hi

[1:01:00] Voice 18: either.

[1:01:01] Voice 22: No, no, I think Kyle said it. Well.

[1:01:03] Voice 18: Yeah. Thank you.

[1:01:04] Voice 18: Okay. Great. Thank you. trustees. Do you have any

[1:01:08] Voice 18: questions? Or comments?

[1:01:16] Voice 10: Yeah, just just a question. So you considered the alternatives

[1:01:23] Voice 10: was like for the garage, for instance, to to tear it down and

[1:01:27] Voice 10: rebuild it. So let me that's pretty clear. Were there other

[1:01:31] Voice 10: Other considerations that you did with a deck to the sea, were there any other options that you could deliberate in?

[1:01:41] Voice 2: Sorry, could you repeat the question in regards to the house?

[1:01:48] Voice 10: I understood it was the deck that's going to be intruding on the setback, not the house itself, or am I getting that wrong?

[1:01:58] Voice 2: So there's a portion of the proposed patio that does protrude.

[1:02:04] Voice 2: I can probably share my screen here really quick. Are you guys able to see that?

[1:02:13] Voice 9: Probably. Yeah,

[1:02:14] Voice 2: I can see it

[1:02:15] Voice 18: now. Thank you. Great.

[1:02:17] Voice 2: So it's essentially just this portion of the

[1:02:22] Voice 2: proposed patio, but that's not a structural deck or anything like that. It would essentially just

[1:02:27] Voice 2: be a permeable paving stone on grade.

[1:02:30] Voice 10: Oh okay, so it's not a deck, it's a patio.

[1:02:32] Voice 10: correct

[1:02:32] Voice 2: yeah so we feel that the impact would be fairly minimal right okay

[1:02:39] Voice 10: yeah so

[1:02:41] Voice 10: i'm finished i'll pass it off to christina so

[1:02:46] Trustee Evans: as i understand it having read the report and looked

[1:02:48] Trustee Evans: at the um the various um images provided the house is being uh renovated in place there are

[1:02:57] Trustee Evans: some structural changes to the renovation the house is not moving any closer to the setback

[1:03:02] Trustee Evans: I can see in fact part of it is being moved further to get into compliance and the proposed

[1:03:08] Trustee Evans: patio which is a permeable patio which is more environmentally friendly is going where the

[1:03:14] Trustee Evans: existing patio is going and a little bit in there is that is that how did I understand that correctly

[1:03:24] Voice 2: yep yeah I would say that's a good uh a good summary I mean you can see there's this portion

[1:03:30] Voice 2: of the existing deck here that's actually been removed completely so the

[1:03:37] Voice 2: building will actually be slightly farther away from the property line than

[1:03:41] Voice 2: it was before and then the port most of the portion of the proposed patio here

[1:03:46] Voice 2: is just within the area where some of that existing deck was previously so

[1:03:53] Voice 2: it's really just this little area right here that would be new permeable patio

[1:03:59] Voice 2: within the setback and

[1:04:01] Trustee Evans: that's actually less in a finished area in the setback

[1:04:06] Trustee Evans: than it currently is correct

[1:04:09] Voice 2: perfect

[1:04:10] Trustee Evans: thank you for clarifying I appreciate

[1:04:11] Trustee Evans: that

[1:04:12] Voice 2: I

[1:04:14] Trustee Evans: have no other questions okay

[1:04:18] Voice 18: then do one of the trustees want to make a

[1:04:24] Voice 18: motion you also have alternatives to request further information or to reject

[1:04:30] Voice 18: the application the recommended uh staff recommended motions at the top there

[1:04:40] Voice 10: um there's a motion here actually i can make the motion that the south canberra island

[1:04:47] Voice 10: local trust committee approved issuance of pl dash dvp dash 2025-0120 thank

[1:05:00] Voice 18: you move to have

[1:05:01] Voice 18: have a seconder seconded by trustee evans any further discussion okay no

[1:05:08] Trustee Evans: i think it was a very

[1:05:09] Trustee Evans: well written report yeah thank

[1:05:13] Voice 18: you everyone and so i'll call for the vote all those in favor

[1:05:18] Voice 18: please

[1:05:20] Voice 11: raise your hand

[1:05:20] Voice 18: or say aye and that is carried thank you so much trustees honor belcher

[1:05:26] Voice 18: mr nielsen and kim and dave congratulations on your uh dvp application and wish you success

[1:05:34] Voice 18: us in your building project. Thanks

[1:05:36] Voice 2: very much. Great. Thank you very much, guys. Thank you.

[1:05:39] Voice 2: Thank

[1:05:40] Voice 18: you. Take care. Bye

[1:05:41] Voice 18: -bye. Bye-bye. Okay. So we'll now move to 14.2 SP TUP 2025-0142.

[1:06:00] Voice 18: And yes, Trustee Evans?

[1:06:01] Trustee Evans: I will recuse myself from the proceedings at this point and join the audience

[1:06:06] Trustee Evans: as the applicant and

[1:06:08] Voice 18: if you could you should declare that you have a conflict of interest

[1:06:12] Voice 18: and that's the reason you're

[1:06:14] Trustee Evans: sure for a conflict of interest as i am the applicant thank you

[1:06:19] Voice 18: um so just so the audience is clear on the proceedings um uh christina evans the applicant

[1:06:27] Voice 18: will be able to speak to her application as anyone else would and answer questions for the ltc

[1:06:33] Voice 18: and when the ltc has no more questions um she will i'll ask her to leave the room so that

[1:06:40] Voice 18: there's no perception or chance that she could unduly influence our decision making process

[1:06:46] Voice 18: through glaring at us or making eyebrow signals

[1:06:50] Voice 14: or anything else

[1:06:51] Voice 18: um while we deliberate and make

[1:06:55] Voice 18: a decision and uh but she has the right to have an agent in the room observing a family member

[1:07:02] Voice 18: anybody else so just so that's clear all right and so i'll turn it to you planner belcher again

[1:07:09] Voice 18: to introduce your report thank

[1:07:12] Voice 1: you uh yeah so this is a new application for a temporary use

[1:07:16] Voice 1: permit to consider a short-term vacation rental at 9907 gowland point road and the application

[1:07:24] Voice 1: would allow a short-term vacation rental in an existing one-bedroom house on the property

[1:07:30] Voice 1: and the proposed capacity is for two guests

[1:07:34] Voice 1: and the requested nine months

[1:07:38] Voice 1: would cover the remainder of 2025

[1:07:40] Voice 1: while the property is for sale

[1:07:42] Voice 1: and a long-term tenant is not possible.

[1:07:48] Voice 1: In the public correspondence,

[1:07:51] Voice 1: we received five letters with no objection to it

[1:07:55] Voice 1: and two letters identifying opposition and concerns.

[1:08:01] Voice 1: which have all been forwarded to the local trust committee and staff consider that the rationale

[1:08:08] Voice 1: for the short-term vacation rental is reasonable and the use is less than a year and temporary in

[1:08:15] Voice 1: nature the size of the dwelling the guest capacity are reasonable and mitigate potential impacts

[1:08:21] Voice 1: associated with the use the cumulative impacts of the short-term vacation rental use would be

[1:08:29] Voice 1: small given the neighborhood and island context and the island's or the property's existing well

[1:08:35] Voice 1: and cistern capacity provides sufficient capacity and water treatment for the proposal

[1:08:41] Voice 1: and the permit provides conditions consistent with the official community

[1:08:47] Voice 1: plan guidelines for short-term vacation rentals and would ensure that the use does not create

[1:08:52] Voice 1: unreasonable impacts on the area. So based on all of these factors, the recommendation from staff

[1:09:01] Voice 1: is that the South Bender Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of temporary use permit

[1:09:08] Voice 1: PLTUP 2025-0142. Thanks.

[1:09:15] Voice 18: Excellent. Thank you, Planner Belcher. Does the applicant wish to

[1:09:19] Voice 18: just speak to your application sure

[1:09:23] Trustee Evans: um so i have been um considering whether to sell the house for

[1:09:32] Trustee Evans: over a year um i have my long-term tenants will be moving out in june as i'm planning on selling

[1:09:42] Trustee Evans: the house i won't be able to get long-term tenants in between them moving out and the sale of the

[1:09:49] Trustee Evans: house. Putting a long-term tenant in reduces my options for selling the house. I have considered

[1:09:59] Trustee Evans: the fact that I am a sitting trustee which is why I didn't go this route earlier but I'm now

[1:10:05] Trustee Evans: no longer in a position where I can keep the property and not have it rented out and I'm also

[1:10:14] Trustee Evans: not in a position where i can rent it out so i do need to sell and i'm applying because without

[1:10:25] Trustee Evans: the ability to have a short-term vacation rental in to cover the months while it is on the market

[1:10:31] Trustee Evans: would cause me hardship um i have tried to avoid this and i am hoping that the sale happens

[1:10:38] Trustee Evans: quickly for many reasons. And I would also like to ask the trustees, should they choose to pass

[1:10:48] Trustee Evans: or approve the temporary use permit, that they add a condition in there that this temporary

[1:10:54] Trustee Evans: use permit is specifically for the sale of the house. Part of the reason for me applying for a

[1:11:02] Trustee Evans: shorter term is, I know that we could apply for up to three years, but I only want this for the

[1:11:10] Trustee Evans: sale of the house. And I also want to avoid a future purchaser acquiring the temporary use

[1:11:20] Trustee Evans: permit. This is specifically for a hardship position, so I can get the house sold. This is

[1:11:28] Trustee Evans: It's not for a business proposition.

[1:11:34] Trustee Evans: I'm not sure if I know that there was some questions that were being asked of me by some neighbors.

[1:11:44] Trustee Evans: One of them being why there were four parking spots and only two people.

[1:11:51] Trustee Evans: The four parking spots are a requirement for the TUP.

[1:11:56] Trustee Evans: They are not part of my application.

[1:11:58] Trustee Evans: I just have to prove that I've got four parking spots available, but I'm only asking for two

[1:12:07] Trustee Evans: guests. And it will be for the main house, not the studio. Because again, in the application,

[1:12:15] Trustee Evans: it is for the main house in order to follow the TUP rules. I'm trying to remember other

[1:12:23] Trustee Evans: questions that I got asked, but I can't remember. So if anybody else does have any questions,

[1:12:31] Trustee Evans: please feel free to ask them, or if you want any clarity, I think you can ask now.

[1:12:36] Trustee Evans: I'm not sure if I'm overstepping my bounds there, but is that correct?

[1:12:41] Voice 18: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Evans. Yeah, no, that's perfectly acceptable. You spoke to your

[1:12:46] Voice 18: application and tried to address any concerns coming from neighboring residents, as is appropriate.

[1:12:54] Voice 18: appropriate. So I don't think I have any questions. I actually, you answered the one about, well, I was going to raise the one about the four driving parking spots, but it is a condition of the current TUP permitting process. And the LTC, as noted by the planner, cannot take away any conditions. It can only add conditions to the temporary use permit as written.

[1:13:23] Voice 18: So, Trustee Falk, do you have any questions or request any clarifications?

[1:13:31] Voice 10: Well, I noticed one of the letters with concerns was suggesting that this might open up to sort of floodgates for more SDVR applications or TUPs.

[1:13:48] Voice 10: And so I just thought we should address that maybe and just kind of have some clarity on that.

[1:13:54] Voice 10: But personally, I don't feel that it does open anything

[1:14:02] Voice 10: because it's a very short window.

[1:14:05] Voice 10: And so I can't see the pressure coming to the LTC

[1:14:12] Voice 10: for approving other full-time permanent STVRs

[1:14:18] Voice 10: as a result of this one very limited application.

[1:14:24] Voice 10: So I'm not convinced by that concern, but I wanted to hear from you as well.

[1:14:37] Voice 10: I'm speaking to you, Chair Elliott.

[1:14:39] Voice 10: Oh,

[1:14:40] Voice 18: sorry. Can you repeat the question about the implications of cumulative impact, potentially?

[1:14:48] Voice 10: Yeah, like somebody was concerned that if we approve this one, we would get a flood of applicants.

[1:14:54] Voice 10: and that, you know, the person making the comment

[1:14:59] Voice 10: did not wish to see more STVRs on the island.

[1:15:04] Voice 10: Yeah.

[1:15:05] Voice 18: Well, so I'll note that there are, I think the planner stated,

[1:15:09] Voice 18: 20 STVRs operating with the non, well, what's the term?

[1:15:21] Voice 18: Sorry.

[1:15:24] Voice 18: Not compliant, but able to operate.

[1:15:27] Voice 18: Is that the right word?

[1:15:28] Voice 18: And there has been no STVR or TUPs for STVRs to date.

[1:15:34] Voice 18: So this is the only one.

[1:15:38] Voice 18: Typically, my understanding is that temporary use permits are sometimes to test a new use.

[1:15:48] Voice 18: And it's an opportunity because it can be pulled back or withdrawn or not renewed if there are issues.

[1:15:56] Voice 18: So the concern that whether this will open up the floodgates, I mean, each application has to be considered on its own merits.

[1:16:07] Voice 18: I would be more concerned if there were a number of short-term vacation rentals operating in the neighborhood and residents were writing and saying that there were impacts on their privacy and noise and so on, and we're not seeing that.

[1:16:25] Voice 18: The other concern that was expressed, I believe in the May 1st letter from Paul and Monica Petrie, was that the referral term for comment was very short.

[1:16:40] Voice 18: And so the request was that the LTC would consider delaying making a final decision, given the short notice, in the interest of broader public interest.

[1:16:50] Voice 18: i don't necessarily see that this is is justified i think there has been enough notice that if

[1:17:02] Voice 18: anybody was concerned they they would be writing in i understand this community to be very active

[1:17:09] Voice 18: in participating in public process and you

[1:17:13] Voice 18: all write and talk to us if there are issues so

[1:17:17] Voice 18: So I'm actually quite satisfied that if there were concerns, we would have heard it.

[1:17:25] Voice 18: And I do recognize the applicant is only requesting a nine-month term, which actually is a good way to test this process for this community.

[1:17:34] Voice 18: And I would be supportive of the application, but I don't have any further questions.

[1:17:40] Voice 18: So, oh, actually, no, I do.

[1:17:44] Voice 18: Forgive me.

[1:17:45] Voice 18: In other TUP applications, I've seen information for guests that includes information on the territorial rights and interests of First Nations.

[1:17:59] Voice 18: And so I would ask you, Ms. Evans, would you be willing to add an information sheet with some information for your guests,

[1:18:11] Voice 18: should the ltc choose to approve it about uh the wasate niche peoples and their place

[1:18:19] Voice 18: and relationship to sadeas um

[1:18:24] Trustee Evans: i would want to see and understand what that is i've gone through the

[1:18:29] Trustee Evans: application process and all of the requirements um and taken all of that into consideration

[1:18:35] Trustee Evans: regarding the environment and sensitive ecosystems etc etc so I would want to understand what that

[1:18:45] Trustee Evans: is especially since that would be a lot of work for such a short period if that's something that

[1:18:52] Trustee Evans: you wish to add into the the requirements for issuing a TUP as a standard practice that should

[1:18:59] Trustee Evans: be something that we should discuss at the LTC level and add that into the requirements

[1:19:04] Trustee Evans: requirements um at this point because the amount of research that it would require

[1:19:10] Trustee Evans: um and all the research that i've currently had to undertake i'm not sure right now so i'm not

[1:19:15] Trustee Evans: going to answer yes or no because i don't understand how much information you want to

[1:19:20] Trustee Evans: be added in there um because there hasn't been any information provided to date the other the

[1:19:27] Trustee Evans: The other two pieces that I wanted to quickly state were currently in the TUPs, only 10 can be issued at a time on South Tender.

[1:19:42] Trustee Evans: And again, I'd like to reiterate, I would like to have another condition added to this application that it be tied specifically to the sale of the house.

[1:19:53] Trustee Evans: And I didn't hear an answer on whether or not you would add that condition to the TUP.

[1:20:00] Voice 18: Yeah, we've heard that and we'll consider it and deliberate.

[1:20:05] Voice 18: I've noted that.

[1:20:07] Voice 18: As for adding a condition, as our understanding of our place and relationship to the land continues to evolve,

[1:20:18] Voice 18: um it i do think it's reasonable to ask that guest information include a territorial acknowledgement

[1:20:29] Voice 18: it doesn't have to

[1:20:30] Voice 18: be it doesn't have to be complicated it's it it and i can give you

[1:20:35] Voice 18: examples a typical one page um the land in in which you know we live is is the traditional

[1:20:44] Voice 18: home and territory of Louis-Saint-Denis peoples you know and I can help you with some wording

[1:20:48] Voice 18: and I know there's community members as well it's just an acknowledgement of place the same way that

[1:20:54] Voice 18: you would point out significant well more significant location sorry yeah it's a situation

[1:21:01] Voice 18: of of our relationship to the land and and I know that you are very respectful of that and

[1:21:07] Voice 18: And so I don't want to put a condition on you,

[1:21:12] Voice 18: but I don't think it would be difficult.

[1:21:15] Voice 18: It's sort of just saying, this is where we are.

[1:21:18] Voice 18: The St. Niche peoples have relationship to these lands and waters,

[1:21:21] Voice 18: and we want to be respectful of that.

[1:21:23] Voice 18: And that's it.

[1:21:26] Voice 18: Does that sound reasonable?

[1:21:28] Trustee Evans: Yes, that sounds reasonable now that you've clarified.

[1:21:30] Trustee Evans: I thought you wanted me to provide a history of the island

[1:21:33] Trustee Evans: from the First Nations perspective.

[1:21:35] Trustee Evans: active and I'm like that's a lot of work for me to do when I'm only asking for a couple of months

[1:21:40] Trustee Evans: by the time I actually get that history pulled together it'll be done no

[1:21:44] Voice 18: no so I misunderstood

[1:21:47] Voice 18: yes I would be fine with

[1:21:48] Trustee Evans: that I'm happy to put my knowledge okay

[1:21:51] Voice 18: okay and and there are people

[1:21:54] Voice 18: who can work with you on that and uh I don't think we need to change the conditions of the

[1:21:58] Voice 18: permit but we could discuss that so I have no further questions thank you for your answers

[1:22:03] Voice 18: Ms. Evans, Trustee Fogg,

[1:22:07] Voice 10: do you have anything else?

[1:22:07] Voice 10: We have a hand up in the audience here.

[1:22:09] Voice 10: I'm not sure if you want to deal with that.

[1:22:13] Voice 18: Not sure anyone.

[1:22:15] Voice 18: Yeah, this is not the time for audience members to contribute.

[1:22:18] Voice 18: They've had the opportunity to weigh in with letters.

[1:22:22] Voice 10: A clarification that was mentioned.

[1:22:29] Voice 18: I don't think that's appropriate at this time.

[1:22:33] Voice 18: Sorry.

[1:22:36] Voice 18: Okay.

[1:22:38] Voice 18: So, Ms.

[1:22:38] Voice 18: Evans, if you want to recuse yourself,

[1:22:40] Voice 18: are we deliberate?

[1:22:43] Voice 4: I am reading.

[1:22:53] Voice 18: That's right, we've got more business. Okay, so as to adding a condition that it would be,

[1:23:04] Voice 18: I'm not sure how that would be worded. Lanner Belcher, do you have any suggestions,

[1:23:10] Voice 18: suggestions, the condition that this is tied to the sale of the house?

[1:23:20] Voice 6: I

[1:23:20] Voice 17: mean, I think the bigger discussion is, is that something the LTC wants to do before we start

[1:23:25] Voice 17: drafting it up? Is this something, that condition, the LTC feels it's important to add to the permit

[1:23:31] Voice 17: before we start going down that road?

[1:23:34] Voice 18: Right. So what I understood is that

[1:23:37] Voice 18: But the applicant was saying they would not want the temporary use to go with the sale of the house.

[1:23:47] Voice 18: If the house was to sell sooner, that it would terminate with that sale.

[1:23:53] Voice 18: And I do agree.

[1:23:53] Voice 18: I think the intent is just, as she stated, financial hardship and being able to move on that sale.

[1:24:05] Voice 18: That's the intent.

[1:24:06] Voice 18: The intent is not as a business.

[1:24:07] Voice 18: So, Trustee Falk, do you agree that that would be a good condition, that the permit would terminate with the sale of the house?

[1:24:16] Voice 10: Yeah, I'm thinking that might be, I wouldn't have a problem with adding that in there.

[1:24:22] Voice 10: Could we say this TUP terminates at the end of nine months or at the time of sale, whichever happens first?

[1:24:36] Voice 18: I'd support that, yeah, Planner Stockdale.

[1:24:38] Voice 18: So

[1:24:39] Voice 17: what you could do is add a condition stating that the short-term vacation rental use may only be in operation while the subject property is for sale.

[1:24:49] Okay.

[1:24:55] Voice 18: Okay.

[1:24:57] Voice 18: So we would add that into those are guidelines.

[1:25:03] Voice 18: Sorry, I'm just going to the permit.

[1:25:05] Voice 18: Can you?

[1:25:05] Voice 18: Yes.

[1:25:06] Voice 17: So on page 33 of the agenda, the planner Belcher has added alternatives for the LTC to consider.

[1:25:13] Voice 17: So number two is adding additional conditions. So what the LTC, if they wish to add this condition, you read that out. You can say with the addition of the following condition to regulate the short term vacation use. So it's only an option or so it's only an operation while the subject property is for sale.

[1:25:34] Voice 17: And then what happens there is that if this does exchange hands, a new property owner has purchased the property, because the condition states that it must be in use when the subject property is for sale, it would kind of void the use.

[1:25:52] Voice 17: And if the new property owners want to have the short-term vacation rental use, they would have to come back to the LTC for approval.

[1:26:02] Voice 10: That's what I would like. I think that's the proper process.

[1:26:05] Voice 10: Great.

[1:26:07] Voice 18: So I'm hearing, and I agree, that we want to add a condition that would regulate the short-term vacation rental so it's only an operation while the property is for sale.

[1:26:18] Voice 18: And I would add a second one from my point of view to add request, sorry, to request that the guest information include acknowledgement of First Nations territorial rights and relationship.

[1:26:30] Voice 18: relationship

[1:26:32] Voice 10: on that point I'm wondering is procedurally like I'm in total agreement that

[1:26:38] Voice 10: that's a good idea to have to start using that but shouldn't we be consistent and can we not

[1:26:44] Voice 10: require that for all STVRs currently and just make that a new requirement is that that's what

[1:26:51] Voice 10: we required we

[1:26:52] Voice 18: would have to go into the STVR regulations as a project to do that so which is

[1:26:59] Voice 10: is what we're going to discuss later which yep

[1:27:01] Voice 18: we can definitely discuss whether that's the next

[1:27:03] Voice 18: project i'm

[1:27:05] Voice 10: just not sure about requiring one because it happens to be one that we're you know

[1:27:10] Voice 10: giving a tup to to to require them to do something that isn't required anywhere else just i don't

[1:27:17] Voice 10: know it's just procedurally since maybe we should be deliberating

[1:27:21] Voice 18: should be considered on its own

[1:27:23] Voice 18: merits and so if the LTC wanted to add conditions such as you say a neighbor requested privacy

[1:27:32] Voice 18: screens because they were going to be impacted this TUP you know you can add that condition

[1:27:38] Voice 18: as a result of that request. I as a trustee am simply stating that you know we've advanced in

[1:27:47] Voice 18: in our acknowledgement of First Nations' relationship to the land,

[1:27:51] Voice 18: and it really should be on all public communications about this island.

[1:28:01] Voice 18: So I don't think it's any different than just considering where we are

[1:28:06] Voice 18: and the importance of that acknowledgement.

[1:28:11] Voice 18: I don't think it's unfair to other TUP or STVR operators.

[1:28:15] Voice 18: Planner Stockdale?

[1:28:17] Voice 18: So

[1:28:17] Voice 17: the applicant has mentioned that she would add that. So the LTC doesn't necessarily have to add that as a condition. It sounds like the applicant is aware of the requirement and she would do that.

[1:28:28] Voice 17: But if the LTC does want to build it into the draft permit, you could amend Section 3G, which requires the property owner or STD operator to post information for guests.

[1:28:43] Voice 17: And you can add a third one that states with the inclusion of a First Nation acknowledgement or something along those lines.

[1:28:50] Voice 17: But it does sound like the applicant is fully aware of what the LTC is wishing.

[1:28:55] Voice 17: so it's up to you the LTC if you want to build that in as a formal condition or leave it up to

[1:29:02] Voice 17: the applicant to do

[1:29:09] Voice 10: I'm happy to go to go with that it doesn't matter to me it there's no harm

[1:29:17] Voice 10: done so if you think that's better if you feel better about having that included I'm fine with

[1:29:24] Voice 10: yeah

[1:29:25] Voice 18: so and sorry planner i thought it was attachment 3k guest information or am i on the

[1:29:32] Voice 18: wrong page maybe i am

[1:29:34] Voice 18: 38 no

[1:29:37] Voice 17: i have 3g attachment 847 what do you have 3g

[1:29:46] Voice 10: 3g this

[1:29:48] Voice 17: is on page 47

[1:29:49] Voice 17: of the stuff of the agenda okay there's a few different checklists here okay you may be yeah

[1:29:55] Voice 17: I'm looking at the draft permit. Oh,

[1:29:57] Voice 18: the attachment eight. Yeah, I see. Yeah, yeah.

[1:30:00] Voice 18: Okay. I think we can require it. The applicants already said they're willing, and I don't think, I think it would be good test language for, you know, a future project to amend what we want to see in permits.

[1:30:18] Voice 18: But we can vote separately on these items, and if you don't agree, Trustee Falcon doesn't have to get added.

[1:30:25] Voice 4: That's fine.

[1:30:25] Voice 18: okay

[1:30:26] Voice 15: so

[1:30:27] Voice 18: so is there any other conditions um that we'd want to see i'm

[1:30:40] Voice 10: happy with just um

[1:30:41] Voice 10: you know that it ends at the time of sale and that it's um right acknowledgement into the

[1:30:49] Voice 10: the agreement so so

[1:30:53] Voice 10: i decided to the agreement and i guess and or is that what we're calling it

[1:30:57] Voice 10: So

[1:30:58] Voice 18: on page 33, the alternative number two, adding conditions, we would want to read that out, that we would amend it by the addition of the following conditions, and then we would just list those two conditions to regulate the STVR so it would only be in operation while it is for sale,

[1:31:22] Voice 18: and two, add acknowledgement of First Nations territorial rights

[1:31:26] Voice 18: in relationship to the guest information or Section G.

[1:31:34] Voice 18: Do you want me to read?

[1:31:35] Voice 18: Oh, yeah.

[1:31:36] Voice 18: And sorry,

[1:31:37] Voice 17: you don't necessarily,

[1:31:38] Voice 17: LTC doesn't have to say it's within Section G.

[1:31:40] Voice 17: It can be added as a new condition or within that commission.

[1:31:43] Voice 17: So you can leave it pretty open-ended if you want.

[1:31:46] Voice 17: Just the addition of a condition to the draft TP

[1:31:49] Voice 17: that requires a First Nation acknowledgement

[1:31:52] Voice 17: or guest information.

[1:31:55] Voice 18: Great.

[1:32:00] Voice 18: Would you like to move the alternative motion there, Trustee Falk, and then we'd consider approving issuance of the amended permit?

[1:32:08] Voice 10: You might be better at it.

[1:32:10] Voice 18: Okay.

[1:32:10] Voice 18: I'm

[1:32:11] Voice 10: a little confused about what the language would say exactly.

[1:32:13] Voice 10: Sure.

[1:32:14] Voice 18: I move that the South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend temporary use permit PLTUP-20250142 to be amended by the addition of the following conditions that regulate the STVR so that it's only in operation while it is for sale and to require an acknowledgement

[1:32:48] Voice 18: of First Nations territory, comma, rights and relationship to guest information.

[1:33:02] Voice 18: Lisa, do you have that okay?

[1:33:09] Voice 16: I'll read it back to you.

[1:33:11] Voice 16: The South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend temporary use permit PLTUP-2025-0142

[1:33:20] Voice 16: be amended by the addition of the following conditions.

[1:33:23] Voice 16: One, that the short-term vacation rental use may only be in operation while the subject property is for sale, and to require acknowledgement of First Nations territory, rights, and relationship to guest information.

[1:33:39] Voice 18: Thank you.

[1:33:41] Voice 16: I'll second that.

[1:33:43] Voice 18: So moved, and seconded by Trustee Falk. Any further discussion?

[1:33:47] Voice 10: No.

[1:33:48] Voice 18: Okay. All those in favor?

[1:33:51] Voice 10: Aye.

[1:33:52] Voice 18: Aye, that is carried. Thank you.

[1:33:56] Voice 18: so now we want to consider um approval or not of the temporary use permit so back up on

[1:34:03] Voice 18: page 29.

[1:34:07] Voice 9: i thought that's what we just did we

[1:34:10] Voice 18: amended the conditions and now we have to approve

[1:34:12] Voice 18: it or not so there's the recommendation that it and then you would just read as amended yeah okay

[1:34:24] Voice 10: Okay, I'll move that to South Pender Island.

[1:34:25] Voice 10: Local task committee approve issue of a self-temporary use permit PLTB-2025-0142 as amended.

[1:34:36] Voice 18: Perfect.

[1:34:37] Voice 18: Moved.

[1:34:38] Voice 18: I will second.

[1:34:40] Voice 18: Any further discussion?

[1:34:42] Voice 18: No.

[1:34:43] Voice 18: I just want to say thank you to the applicant.

[1:34:47] Voice 18: It is a stressful thing, I understand, to put this before the community,

[1:34:54] Voice 18: And I can understand, you know, putting a property up for sale and considering guests and everything else.

[1:35:01] Voice 18: I appreciate the transparency with which she expressed her needs.

[1:35:08] Voice 18: And I think this will be a good test case for a temporary use permit without having a really long-term effect.

[1:35:17] Voice 18: So I'm appreciative of the nine-month time frame.

[1:35:20] Voice 18: We'll see how it goes.

[1:35:22] Voice 10: Great. Marty, will you tell her?

[1:35:24] Voice 10: Well,

[1:35:25] Voice 18: we have to vote. All those in favor?

[1:35:29] Voice 10: Aye.

[1:35:30] Voice 18: And aye. That is carried. Congratulations. Yes, Marty.

[1:35:36] Voice 15: Somebody go get her.

[1:35:38] Voice 15: Let her know.

[1:35:39] Voice 18: Come back into the room. Thanks. Why don't we take a 15-minute recess?

[1:35:46] Voice 19: Sitting in the car.

[1:35:48] Voice 18: maybe 10 minutes 10 minutes

[1:35:51] Voice 17: let's do

[1:35:52] Voice 18: let's do 10 minutes

[1:35:53] Voice 18: yeah that's great thanks everyone we'll

[1:35:55] Voice 18: come back at 12 uh 18 apologies everyone and here we are everyone

[1:48:31] Voice 15: back in the room

[1:48:36] Voice 15: Okay.

[1:48:38] Voice 18: So let's turn to section 15, our local trust committee projects, page 49 to 64 of the agenda here, unless I'm on the wrong agenda again.

[1:48:53] Voice 18: Understock Dill, if you want to introduce your report, please.

[1:48:56] Voice 18: Thank

[1:48:57] Voice 17: you, Chair. So this staff report is in regards to the Minor Land Use By-law Amendment

[1:49:02] Voice 17: Project. It's to seek further amendments from the LTC and the potential for the LTC to give

[1:49:10] Voice 17: first reading today. So there was a special meeting held on March 27th of this year

[1:49:19] Voice 17: And the primary discussion was around Agricultural Land Commission's regulations regarding agritourism and agritourist accommodation uses, maximum floor area on the charts, a potential for an increase to the current maximum floor area regulations, and a single chart for those floor areas as well.

[1:49:46] Voice 17: So what I'm going to speak to today is around the agritourism and agritourist accommodation, and then I'll speak to the maximum floor area and the LTC. I'm not sure if you'd like me to pause after the agricultural regulations and we can have the discussion and then we can go into the maximum floor area.

[1:50:06] Voice 17: It seems to work really well.

[1:50:07] Voice 17: um so to the current draft bylaw 129 actually removes the conditions of use for agri-tourists

[1:50:22] Voice 17: or agri-tourism and agri-tourist accommodation currently in the land use bylaw 122 as it stands

[1:50:29] Voice 17: right now, those conditions of use are in there. And just so the LTC is aware, the ALC defines

[1:50:39] Voice 17: agritourism as a farm use, and it has a really set specific activities for agritourism. And those are

[1:50:48] Voice 17: an agricultural heritage exhibit, a tour or educational activity on the agricultural land,

[1:50:57] Voice 17: A cart, sleigh and tractor rides, activities that promote or market livestock being raised on the agricultural land, dog trials held on the agricultural land or harvest festivals.

[1:51:13] Voice 17: So there's really specific allowable uses within that term agritourism by the ALC.

[1:51:21] Voice 17: And then agritourist accommodation has to be accessory to the agritourist use.

[1:51:29] Voice 17: So if you have, if your property owner is in the agricultural land reserve and they have an active agritourist use, for example, agricultural heritage exhibit, you're permitted a accommodation for that use.

[1:51:49] Voice 17: use. So because the list of agritourism activities is really limited, the likelihood of that activity

[1:51:57] Voice 17: on South Pender is potentially quite low. And consequently, as I mentioned in the staff report,

[1:52:03] Voice 17: the likelihood of an accessory agritourism accommodation is even that much smaller.

[1:52:09] Voice 17: So I put together a chart, which is on page 52 of the agenda, and it goes through the regulations

[1:52:17] Voice 17: regulations um that are included uh that were included in bylaw number one actually that should

[1:52:25] Voice 17: be 122 pardon me or bylaw 114 then i've listed the enabling alc policy or regulation and staff's

[1:52:34] Voice 17: recommendation so the majority of these is to um keep our amending bylaw 129 as is as it removes

[1:52:44] Voice 17: all those conditions of use. And what that does is then we rely on those regulations or policies

[1:52:53] Voice 17: that are given by the ALC. And ALC policies and regulations do change over time.

[1:53:01] Voice 17: So that's another thing the LTC should consider. If these conditions of use do stay in the land

[1:53:07] Voice 17: use bylaw, you'll have to constantly keep an eye on them to see if they still match

[1:53:12] Voice 17: what the ALC um how the ALC is regulating those two uses uh two items that the LTC may want to

[1:53:21] Voice 17: consider to regulate which you which in local government can is um regarding the number of days

[1:53:29] Voice 17: um a tourist an agri-tourist accommodation can be in use um secondly the number of guests that

[1:53:38] Voice 17: may be accommodated in agri-tourist accommodation. Currently, the ALC states that agri-tourist

[1:53:47] Voice 17: accommodation is provided on a seasonal or short-term basis only. They don't provide any

[1:53:52] Voice 17: further definition or clarity on what seasonal or short-time basis is. So the LTC could, currently

[1:54:01] Voice 17: there's a limit of 180 days so that's something the LTC could keep in by law 114 and additionally

[1:54:09] Voice 17: the ALC regulates number of sleeping units to 10 but it doesn't regulate how many guests

[1:54:17] Voice 17: so the LTC may want to consider including a number of guests or perhaps the LTC is okay

[1:54:25] Voice 17: with the regulations set out by the ALC.

[1:54:28] Voice 17: So we'll leave that there.

[1:54:30] Voice 17: As mentioned, the Draft Bylaw 129

[1:54:33] Voice 17: currently removes all those conditions of uses,

[1:54:37] Voice 17: still allows the use,

[1:54:38] Voice 17: but it removes all the conditions.

[1:54:41] Voice 17: And then a property owner,

[1:54:43] Voice 17: if they wanted to do agritourism,

[1:54:45] Voice 17: which is permitted by the zone,

[1:54:47] Voice 17: they would have to make sure

[1:54:48] Voice 17: that they're in compliance

[1:54:49] Voice 17: with the regulations and policies

[1:54:50] Voice 17: of the Agricultural Land Commission.

[1:55:03] Voice 18: Thank you, Planner Stockdale.

[1:55:04] Voice 18: um trustee patrick uh evans sorry um

[1:55:09] Trustee Evans: i would like to have a discussion on a few of these items

[1:55:12] Trustee Evans: so on page 52 item number 16 which which um in the bylaw 114 regulation states agritourism and

[1:55:24] Trustee Evans: agritourist accommodation are only permitted on a lot in the agricultural land reserve

[1:55:30] Trustee Evans: reserve. I would like to keep that in our bylaw. I didn't find the reference in the ALRUR when I

[1:55:42] Trustee Evans: went looking for that the agritourism and agritourism accommodation has to be located

[1:55:47] Trustee Evans: within the agricultural land reserve. We do have larger properties that have, or we do have other

[1:55:56] Trustee Evans: the properties that aren't necessarily in the agricultural land reserve that might have farm

[1:56:01] Trustee Evans: status or something along those lines. I just want to make sure that this type of tourism activity

[1:56:07] Trustee Evans: remains in the ALR. So I would propose that we maintain number 16 and that's currently in

[1:56:17] Trustee Evans: bylaw 114 that it is maintained in there. I have a couple of others we want to discuss these

[1:56:24] Trustee Evans: individually yes

[1:56:26] Voice 18: I'd prefer it if we just take them one by one and so are you finished with

[1:56:33] Voice 18: your question there I'm

[1:56:34] Trustee Evans: finished with that one yeah

[1:56:35] Voice 18: okay so my interpretation was that by removing

[1:56:41] Voice 18: that regulation that it would then just conform to the ALR use regulation

[1:56:51] Voice 18: population planner stock deal am i not understanding how would how would that remove

[1:56:59] Voice 18: the the the potential for agri-tourism use in the agriculture on alr land if i can try to

[1:57:08] Voice 17: summarize what trustee evans was saying is to limit the potential for a property that's not

[1:57:15] Voice 17: in the alr to have the ability for agri-tourism so you only want it or you only want to permit

[1:57:22] Voice 17: that use on lots within the ALR. Correct. And I'd imagine that I don't have the number in

[1:57:27] Voice 17: a from me or the map, but I believe most of the properties that are zone agriculture are in the

[1:57:33] Voice 17: ALR. But to ensure we can go a step further, you can include that. So it's pretty straightforward.

[1:57:39] Voice 17: It just says that both of these uses are only permitted on a lot located in the ALR. You can

[1:57:46] Voice 17: also tie it into the permitted uses, but I think it's more clear if you just keep it as a condition

[1:57:51] Voice 17: of use. Correct. Does

[1:57:52] Voice 17: that help answer your question, Chair Elliott?

[1:57:56] Trustee Evans: And my reasoning for

[1:57:59] Trustee Evans: making sure that we retain this one is that it isn't clear within the ALR you are. So if we're

[1:58:06] Trustee Evans: only relying on the ALR regulation, it's not clear in there that this permitted use is only permitted

[1:58:13] Trustee Evans: within agricultural land reserves only. So we would be taking it one step further. So by maintaining

[1:58:24] Trustee Evans: cleaning it is that was that helpful i

[1:58:34] Voice 10: would have thought that would be kind of automatically

[1:58:38] Voice 10: only like if it's in the um alr it's

[1:58:43] Trustee Evans: not i couldn't find the reference no

[1:58:45] Voice 10: but i mean

[1:58:45] Voice 10: the alr is for the alr like whatever rules they have is for the alr it's not for other land they

[1:58:52] Voice 10: have in business

[1:58:52] Voice 10: i mean that's you don't have to say that i don't think but i may be misreading it

[1:58:57] Trustee Evans: But yeah, so what I'm trying to maintain here

[1:59:00] Trustee Evans: is that agritourism is only permitted

[1:59:03] Trustee Evans: within properties that are within the ALR lands,

[1:59:07] Trustee Evans: that it doesn't go to, let's say there's a 10 acre

[1:59:10] Trustee Evans: that's not in the ALR lands

[1:59:11] Trustee Evans: and they want to start up an agritourism business.

[1:59:15] Trustee Evans: It's outside of the ALR lands.

[1:59:18] Voice 10: Yeah, from my perspective,

[1:59:20] Voice 10: the ALR is somebody sat in an office

[1:59:25] Voice 10: and drew some circles some red lines on the map and it doesn't make perfect sense across the

[1:59:32] Voice 10: problems there's some mountain tops that are you know in the ALR steep reaches and then there's

[1:59:38] Voice 10: land that's perfectly like a golf course and it's a golf course it's not in the ALR

[1:59:43] Voice 10: so the the primary reason to the ALR is sort of haphazard I haven't looked at

[1:59:49] Voice 10: Southpender in particular to sort of tease out exactly what's what but

[1:59:53] Voice 11: isn't

[1:59:54] Voice 10: there a circumstance

[1:59:55] Voice 10: where we might want to encourage somebody to farm and do exactly what somebody would do

[2:00:00] Voice 10: AOR land even though they're not in the AOR okay

[2:00:03] Trustee Evans: as an example if on your property you've got

[2:00:07] Trustee Evans: horses you've got vegetables etc and you're not in the AOR correct right so if you decided that

[2:00:16] Trustee Evans: you wanted to start an agritourism business and follow the agritourism guidelines building an

[2:00:25] Trustee Evans: accessory building as per how you're allowed to and setting up a business for people to come and

[2:00:33] Trustee Evans: see the horses to see how you set up your environment you are you we don't have anything

[2:00:38] Trustee Evans: currently to regulate that because we haven't said it's only to happen on ALR lands for agritourism

[2:00:46] Trustee Evans: what I'm suggesting is that we limit this to ALR land like to the ALR you

[2:00:52] Voice 10: know what I'm saying is

[2:00:54] Voice 10: if a property was outside of it

[2:00:56] Voice 10: but had all those activities that would normally

[2:00:58] Voice 10: be conducted on ALR land

[2:01:00] Voice 10: do we want to prohibit

[2:01:02] Voice 10: those people from

[2:01:04] Voice 10: like there's reasons why

[2:01:06] Voice 10: this is allowed right because ALR has

[2:01:08] Voice 10: determined that for financial reasons

[2:01:11] Voice 10: liability

[2:01:12] Voice 10: for small farms they need

[2:01:14] Voice 10: that extra income from

[2:01:17] Voice 10: agritourism and that

[2:01:18] Voice 10: in order for them to not have to go out and get

[2:01:20] Voice 10: a new job or whatever in order to

[2:01:22] Voice 10: operate they need that extra

[2:01:24] Voice 10: income and why would we want to take that away just because somebody might not be in the LR

[2:01:30] Voice 10: but they did everything else as if they were in the LR so I just don't want to remove that

[2:01:35] Voice 10: possibility I guess is what I'm saying. Okay

[2:01:38] Trustee Evans: maybe I should turn my question over to the planner

[2:01:43] Trustee Evans: if a situation like that were to occur is there anything that there would be nothing to prohibit

[2:01:51] Trustee Evans: the the person from in a residential zone to well

[2:01:56] Voice 17: it would have to be in the agriculture zone well

[2:01:58] Trustee Evans: right now if we remove this yep

[2:02:00] Voice 17: it's not

[2:02:01] Voice 17: it's still only a permitted a use in the agriculture

[2:02:04] Voice 17: zone so

[2:02:05] Trustee Evans: you have to have a zone

[2:02:05] Voice 17: yeah where does it say that not by those in the so if you look

[2:02:10] Voice 17: at the residential resident rural residential zone it will outline a certain uses that are

[2:02:17] Voice 17: permanent within that zone in the agriculture zone that's the only zone that allows agritourism

[2:02:24] Voice 17: okay and agritourist accommodation okay

[2:02:28] Trustee Evans: so it's already that hasn't been removed that has not

[2:02:31] Trustee Evans: been removed okay then i'm okay if this because as long as it's is it somewhere because i couldn't

[2:02:36] Trustee Evans: okay i'm i'm okay okay all right thank

[2:02:39] Voice 18: you sorry i'm i need to ask a question at this point um

[2:02:43] Voice 18: So agriculture zone, are all the lots in the agriculture zone ALR lands?

[2:02:52] Voice 15: I don't have

[2:02:54] Voice 17: that exact information.

[2:02:57] Voice 17: I think we looked into this before and they are not.

[2:03:02] Voice 18: So lots that are in the agriculture zone, if we remove these regulations and revert to the ALR policies and regulations,

[2:03:15] Voice 18: regulations that would remove the permit permission for agritourism on lots that are

[2:03:21] Voice 18: in the agriculture zone but not in the ALR it

[2:03:25] Voice 17: wouldn't yeah it would still allow the use

[2:03:28] Voice 17: it would remove those specific conditions it

[2:03:33] Voice 18: would allow the use but remove those specific

[2:03:36] Voice 18: conditions okay now I'm confused it's allowing the

[2:03:43] Voice 18: use of agritourism but not how it's regulated

[2:03:46] Voice 18: that's right it would it would be regulated by the al r r u r no

[2:03:52] Trustee Evans: it was outside of that so

[2:03:54] Voice 18: that's

[2:03:55] Trustee Evans: why i'm saying i think this is important yeah

[2:03:57] Voice 18: no i agree i don't want to skip over it

[2:04:01] Voice 18: um if i may through

[2:04:04] Voice 17: the chair please do it's worthwhile i'm going to try to look for the map

[2:04:10] Voice 17: right now the information to see what lots that are zone agriculture are actually included in the

[2:04:16] Voice 17: the ALR. I tried to find that information right now. But if I can't find it, I can prepare that

[2:04:21] Voice 17: information. I am recommending a special meeting over the next couple of months electronically,

[2:04:28] Voice 17: and I can bring that information back to the LTC. There's still time, but I'll look for it right now.

[2:04:36] Voice 18: Right. So let's pause that point and go on to the next consideration.

[2:04:43] Voice 18: consideration yeah so my

[2:04:46] Trustee Evans: next one that i've got is 19 um so currently the alr states that

[2:04:54] Trustee Evans: the total developed area for structures landscapes and access for the accommodation

[2:04:59] Trustee Evans: is less than five percent of any parcel so if you've got a 30 acre lot then that makes for a

[2:05:08] Trustee Evans: large accommodation um opportunity i would like to keep our previous um restriction which reduced

[2:05:19] Trustee Evans: it uh which said the agritourist accommodation buildings and structures must not exceed a floor

[2:05:26] Trustee Evans: area of 969 square feet i think that's reasonable versus uh five percent of 30 acres

[2:05:38] Voice 19: acres

[2:05:39] Trustee Evans: okay five percent of 30 acres could be up to 65 000 square feet i think

[2:05:44] Voice 18: that's too much

[2:05:45] Voice 18: 36 000 square feet but that's also including structures landscaping and access i'm guessing

[2:05:52] Voice 18: like a pathway or a road 969 square feet is like the size of a large resident accessory dwelling

[2:06:01] Voice 18: line unit yes

[2:06:03] Trustee Evans: so it's both if that's what we're restricting is the accommodation building itself

[2:06:08] Trustee Evans: so

[2:06:10] Voice 15: the

[2:06:11] Trustee Evans: accommodation building should be restricted to the current what was what's

[2:06:15] Trustee Evans: currently in there 969 square feet i'm recommending that we retain that okay

[2:06:20] Voice 18: so retaining 19 and not

[2:06:23] Voice 18: remove that uh trustee falk do you have thoughts on that

[2:06:29] Voice 18: seems reasonable to me i let

[2:06:32] Voice 10: me think it's no

[2:06:35] Voice 18: worries okay

[2:06:50] Voice 6: yeah i'm all right

[2:06:52] Voice 6: i don't

[2:06:53] Voice 19: have any concerns um great i

[2:07:00] Trustee Evans: would be in support of keeping number 20 as recommended

[2:07:03] Trustee Evans: by staff which is the agritourist accommodation must not be in use for more than 180 days

[2:07:10] Trustee Evans: mcallaghy year that's approximately six months um i think that that's reasonable so it doesn't

[2:07:19] Trustee Evans: become a full-time occupational um tourist business the other one and just i'll just

[2:07:36] Trustee Evans: wait to see if you have any comments on that so

[2:07:39] Voice 10: is that the 180 days um i'm just trying to picture

[2:07:47] Voice 10: in real life what this is right like how does this correlate with the farming activities well

[2:07:54] Trustee Evans: this is this is uh the section states uh so the alr states that accommodation is provided on a

[2:07:59] Trustee Evans: seasonal or short-term basis only so we're just specifying that it can be no more than 180 days

[2:08:13] Voice 12: for

[2:08:15] Voice 19: six months out of a year i'm in agreement with that yeah

[2:08:23] Voice 15: i'm okay with that okay

[2:08:25] Voice 18: okay so that's one

[2:08:28] Voice 18: good

[2:08:29] Trustee Evans: number 21 it currently in our bylaw it currently says

[2:08:36] Trustee Evans: agritourist accommodation may include associated uses such as meeting rooms

[2:08:42] Trustee Evans: and dining facilities for paying registered guests contained wholly within the agritourism

[2:08:49] Trustee Evans: accommodation unit but may not include a restaurant or any commercial or retail goods and services

[2:08:57] Trustee Evans: other than those permitted by the agriculture zone. So staff said that that reference couldn't

[2:09:06] Trustee Evans: be found. I don't know where this came from as I wasn't part of the meetings when this came into

[2:09:16] Trustee Evans: effect i think in bylaw 114 whenever it came into effect so i would propose that we keep it unless

[2:09:24] Trustee Evans: it becomes a problem and then we can discuss changes or removal rather than removing it

[2:09:36] Voice 10: so the um the accommodation area portion of the building for the

[2:09:46] Voice 10: agritourism associated uses like if that's included and all of a sudden a 900 square foot

[2:09:51] Voice 10: the place becomes pretty darn small. There has to be a meeting room for 20 people or something,

[2:09:57] Voice 10: 10 people. Does that make sense to say to limit it to the 900 square feet, 969 square feet and

[2:10:10] Voice 10: then after that say well but if you want to do something like that though, I was going to say

[2:10:14] Voice 10: quilting workshop with a problem of farming related, you know some kind of milk making or

[2:10:19] Voice 10: or cheese making or something like that,

[2:10:21] Voice 10: if you were going to do that and you needed to have a space

[2:10:24] Voice 10: in both of the facilities, I don't see how that would be doable.

[2:10:28] Trustee Evans: Yes, so the accommodation building versus the agritourism,

[2:10:36] Trustee Evans: like you said, a milking facility or something like that.

[2:10:38] Trustee Evans: I think those would be two different structures.

[2:10:41] Trustee Evans: This is just saying that the tourist accommodation

[2:10:45] Trustee Evans: can have dining facilities in there, not just bedrooms.

[2:10:50] Trustee Evans: so it's not just accommodation whereas currently says it's an accommodation so we're saying you

[2:10:55] Trustee Evans: can have downy facility you can have a kitchen in there right

[2:10:58] Voice 10: yeah the word may i guess makes it

[2:11:00] Voice 10: okay yeah i just yeah i reacted to feeling like this yeah prescribed that if you wanted those

[2:11:07] Voice 10: things you have to do it in the building but that's not what it's saying so i'm good yeah so

[2:11:10] Trustee Evans: so i how i read this it's it's to me it's saying that there can be a kitchen in there

[2:11:15] Trustee Evans: you can cook your own meals but you're not allowed to have a restaurant right is did I

[2:11:27] Trustee Evans: am I reading that correctly um am I misinterpreting that yep you're correct yep so this is just

[2:11:41] Trustee Evans: allowing for the accommodations to have kitchen and and be able to eat yep that's the way I

[2:11:48] Trustee Evans: interpret it yeah so I think that's an important thing to keep because otherwise the accommodations

[2:11:55] Trustee Evans: is purely accommodation sure

[2:12:00] Voice 18: i'm in support of that so 21 um just default do you support that

[2:12:07] Voice 18: keeping it in yeah okay

[2:12:09] Voice 18: and

[2:12:11] Trustee Evans: then the last one is number 22 i recommend that we keep that as well

[2:12:15] Trustee Evans: because it limits the number of guests to 10 or five bedrooms whereas the alr lists that the

[2:12:25] Trustee Evans: accommodation is limited to 10 sleeping units which can be an awful lot more than 10 people

[2:12:33] Trustee Evans: and given the nature of our island with regards to water etc and other resources it's best to

[2:12:40] Trustee Evans: limit further and keep the previous limit in place okay so if we're okay with that

[2:13:04] Trustee Evans: and i'm asking before i do this to make a motion to keep 19 19 through 22 and we will come back

[2:13:16] Trustee Evans: and revisit 16 at a later date yes are you okay if i make that motion i'm

[2:13:26] Voice 18: not sure we're ready

[2:13:27] Voice 18: to make motions because we i'm just going back to how we want this to read because we're going

[2:13:33] Voice 18: going to have a resolution to amend the draft bylaw by so we'll list that in section b

[2:13:46] Voice 18: unless planner stockdale do you think we should make the amendments and then move

[2:13:52] Voice 18: the amended draft bylaw but

[2:13:55] Voice 17: the ltc can make the amendment to the draft bylaw now if you like

[2:14:00] Voice 17: you can make two separate amendments because they are two separate ideas um happy to do that

[2:14:06] Voice 17: i'm just going to put together some language for that amendment um okay

[2:14:15] Voice 16: just one moment

[2:14:16] Voice 16: that's

[2:14:20] Voice 19: going to keep it simple just

[2:14:23] Voice 17: pulling up the land use bylaw right now so we're amending

[2:14:27] Voice 17: the right sections okay so it's 19 through 22 19 through 22 so the possible motion would be

[2:14:40] Voice 17: be that the South Pender Island Local Trust Committee

[2:14:43] Voice 17: amend draft by-law number 129

[2:14:46] Voice 17: by amending section 2.22

[2:14:51] Voice 17: to retain subsection 5.5, 19 through 22

[2:15:07] Voice 17: in land use by-law number 114.

[2:15:10] Voice 17: And that would be fine.

[2:15:17] Voice 18: Okay, good. I'm just going to check in with staff, Lisa Millard.

[2:15:25] Voice 16: Yes, I have that. Do you want it read back?

[2:15:27] Voice 18: Sure. Yes, please.

[2:15:30] Voice 16: That the South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend draft bylaw number 129 by

[2:15:35] Voice 16: amending section 2.22 to retain subsection 5.5 19 through 22 in land use bylaw number 114.

[2:15:46] Voice 16: 114 wow

[2:15:50] Voice 18: thank you so moved uh by trustee evans well i haven't

[2:15:57] Voice 18: moved it no i'm out i'm calling

[2:16:00] Voice 18: for a mover yes

[2:16:02] Trustee Evans: so okay do you want me to actually move it please do i move so so uh yeah sorry um

[2:16:11] Trustee Evans: um the stock still

[2:16:13] Trustee Evans: created a motion the minute taker captured the motion i'm going to move the

[2:16:20] Trustee Evans: motion so i move that south pender island local child's committee amend by draft bylaw 129 by

[2:16:27] Trustee Evans: amending uh section 2.2.2 to retain subsection 5.5.19 through 22 in land use bylaw 114

[2:16:37] Trustee Evans: great do i have a

[2:16:38] Voice 18: seconder i'll

[2:16:40] Voice 10: second that i'm

[2:16:41] Voice 18: seconded by trustee falk any further discussion

[2:16:44] Voice 18: discussion on the thrice red amendment. Good job, everyone. I'll call for the vote. Oh,

[2:16:54] Voice 18: Planner Stockdale. Sorry.

[2:16:55] Voice 18: No, call for the vote. All those in favor? Aye. And that is carried.

[2:17:00] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:17:02] Voice 17: Planner Stockdale? Thank you. So for the record, at the next meeting, if that's a

[2:17:08] Voice 17: special meeting or the regular meeting, staff will come back with a map and table showing

[2:17:14] Voice 17: showing agricultural zone properties and ALR boundaries for reference just so it's in the

[2:17:20] Voice 17: minutes that's

[2:17:23] Voice 18: great okay do we want to move on to total and maximum floor area

[2:17:32] Voice 18: are there any other considerations trustee Evans I

[2:17:39] Trustee Evans: do have one minor edit it is for further down

[2:17:44] Trustee Evans: I don't know if you want to deal with this now or later it's a misunderstanding with regards to

[2:17:51] Trustee Evans: the motor vehicle license plate and the current year license decal.

[2:17:58] Trustee Evans: I'm just asking if you want to deal with this now.

[2:18:00] Voice 15: Sure.

[2:18:00] Trustee Evans: No, we can go to that next. What page is that?

[2:18:03] Trustee Evans: On 57 and it's item 2.7.

[2:18:13] Trustee Evans: So that section got removed in its entirety,

[2:18:20] Trustee Evans: whereas if we go, and I apologize, we got to page 18.

[2:18:26] Trustee Evans: I think it's page 14.

[2:18:27] Trustee Evans: no i beg your pardon sorry hold on 57 um go off um in the current land use by law section 3111a

[2:18:42] Trustee Evans: says the motor vehicle so okay so let me back up um uh this this line motor vehicle

[2:18:54] Trustee Evans: number plate and the current license year decal or has been removed in its entirety

[2:19:00] Trustee Evans: the only piece that was supposed to be removed was and the current license year decal okay we

[2:19:06] Trustee Evans: still want the motor vehicle to have a license plate so we don't want to remove that from the

[2:19:15] Trustee Evans: bylaw it was just the current license year decal which is no longer supported by icbc

[2:19:21] Trustee Evans: okay

[2:19:23] Voice 17: just one moment that

[2:19:33] Voice 12: was the original intent

[2:19:37] Voice 17: 3111a which

[2:19:48] Voice 15: 3111

[2:19:49] Voice 15: i don't

[2:20:09] Voice 17: want to keep having the wrong bylaw open i apologize everyone i have multiple versions open

[2:20:15] Voice 17: and i want to make sure i'm referencing the correct one it's always helpful so just for

[2:20:19] Voice 17: reference there we go this

[2:20:20] Trustee Evans: is under the subheading

[2:20:22] Voice 17: derelict vehicles okay so you would uh the intent

[2:20:26] Voice 17: is just to remove the words and the current license year decal correct so

[2:20:34] Voice 10: can i just ask

[2:20:35] Voice 10: What's our intent?

[2:20:37] Voice 10: What is it we want?

[2:20:39] Trustee Evans: Because the current license year decal is no longer supported by ICBC,

[2:20:44] Trustee Evans: having this in our bylaws will make every vehicle on the island...

[2:20:49] Trustee Evans: Sure,

[2:20:49] Voice 10: sure. I understand the part of what we're picking up,

[2:20:52] Voice 10: but what we're leaving, what is it that we want to accomplish

[2:20:56] Voice 10: by what we're leaving?

[2:20:58] Trustee Evans: So it says here, a lot shall not be used for the storage

[2:21:01] Trustee Evans: of more than one unlicensed motor vehicle other than farm and forestry vehicles that is not

[2:21:07] Trustee Evans: completely enclosed in a permanent building or structure and for this purpose the motor vehicle

[2:21:12] Trustee Evans: is unlicensed if it does not display a motor vehicle number plate right

[2:21:18] Voice 10: and so what what is

[2:21:20] Voice 10: what is our purpose like um you if i insure a vehicle and i let it expire

[2:21:27] Voice 10: fire

[2:21:28] Voice 4: nobody

[2:21:29] Voice 10: comes and takes the plate away right so i'm i have an unlicensed plated vehicle so

[2:21:38] Voice 10: that's one option if i if i do renew my insurance then i have an insured registered vehicle

[2:21:48] Voice 10: so what what is it we're wanting are we wanting to say you have to have insurance on it or are

[2:21:53] Voice 10: we wanting to say that you're registered because they're two different things you'd

[2:21:56] Trustee Evans: have to we'd

[2:21:56] Trustee Evans: have to read the rest of the bylaw to understand that but the the housekeeping piece here is that

[2:22:03] Trustee Evans: icbc no longer supports the decals and that piece needs to be

[2:22:07] Trustee Evans: removed no

[2:22:08] Voice 10: i get that i'm just

[2:22:09] Voice 10: wondering what what it is we want to be left with there's a big difference between having a registered

[2:22:14] Voice 10: vehicle you know it's registered in your name and they you know icbc has that on record you can go

[2:22:20] Voice 10: down there and you can ensure it anytime you want but you don't have or you can actually leave it

[2:22:23] Voice 10: registered in your name or

[2:22:26] Voice 10: whoever, and not have it

[2:22:28] Voice 10: licensed, are we wanting them to be licensed

[2:22:30] Voice 10: or are we wanting them to be registered?

[2:22:32] Voice 10: And that's what we

[2:22:33] Voice 10: need to determine

[2:22:33] Voice 10: before we start fucking wordsmithing.

[2:22:37] Trustee Evans: We're not really wordsmithing

[2:22:38] Trustee Evans: here, we're just taking out a legacy

[2:22:40] Trustee Evans: piece that is problematic.

[2:22:42] Trustee Evans: If we want to actually look at this and

[2:22:44] Trustee Evans: figure out what the issues are and how to address it,

[2:22:46] Trustee Evans: that would be a different project. This is purely

[2:22:48] Trustee Evans: housekeeping.

[2:22:50] Voice 10: This is clear

[2:22:52] Voice 10: that they wanted it to be licensed

[2:22:54] Voice 10: and we're taking it out.

[2:22:57] Voice 10: Are we still wanting it to be licensed?

[2:23:00] Trustee Evans: How do you prove that on your license plate?

[2:23:02] Trustee Evans: Currently, the ICBC, they don't support that anymore.

[2:23:05] Voice 10: You don't have to prove anything.

[2:23:07] Voice 10: Well, you have the insurance papers, right?

[2:23:11] Voice 10: Like the police not have a scanner on their car,

[2:23:13] Voice 10: so they drive on the road.

[2:23:15] Voice 10: Any car that drives by them,

[2:23:17] Voice 10: their expiry date shows up on their screen.

[2:23:20] Trustee Evans: So this, I think, is getting into a larger conversation

[2:23:22] Trustee Evans: than the original intent?

[2:23:25] Voice 10: Yeah, we can't delete something

[2:23:28] Voice 10: that changes the intent

[2:23:29] Voice 10: or makes the original intent unclear.

[2:23:33] Voice 10: I

[2:23:33] Voice 18: think we've had this discussion quite a few times

[2:23:38] Voice 18: and I don't believe it changes the intent,

[2:23:43] Voice 18: Trustee Falk.

[2:23:46] Voice 10: That's all I'm asking.

[2:23:47] Voice 10: Because

[2:23:48] Voice 18: the DECL used to be a requirement

[2:23:52] Voice 18: a practice of ICBC

[2:23:54] Voice 18: that you had a current year decal

[2:23:56] Voice 18: that said this vehicle

[2:23:58] Voice 18: is insured. They no longer

[2:24:00] Voice 18: do that. So all it is

[2:24:02] Voice 18: is removing that requirement that a decal

[2:24:04] Voice 18: with the current year

[2:24:06] Voice 18: registration be on the license

[2:24:08] Voice 18: plate.

[2:24:18] Trustee Evans: I feel

[2:24:19] Voice 10: like nobody's hearing what I'm

[2:24:21] Voice 10: saying.

[2:24:22] Trustee Evans: We have to look at the entire

[2:24:24] Trustee Evans: centre in its entirety.

[2:24:26] Trustee Evans: I'm just all I've got with me right now is is the error that was misunderstood but what I'm

[2:24:34] Voice 10: saying is by taking it out you're changing the intent you're changing the clarity it now lacks

[2:24:40] Voice 10: clarity we do not know with it in there we know you have to have your vehicle licensed because

[2:24:46] Voice 18: you cannot get a

[2:24:47] Voice 10: decal without having a license they

[2:24:49] Voice 18: don't you don't do decals anymore they don't

[2:24:54] Voice 10: exist

[2:24:54] Voice 18: i

[2:24:55] Voice 10: understand that but you can be insured or registered only right your vehicle can be

[2:25:01] Voice 10: registered in your name basically for a very very small fee or you could be insured for a very very

[2:25:07] Voice 10: large fee that's a big difference we have to be clear we cannot say it's up to you we have to be

[2:25:14] Voice 10: clear what

[2:25:15] Voice 4: does the rest of the section say so i can't see that part it says or

[2:25:22] Voice 17: an interim vehicle

[2:25:24] Voice 17: Vehicle license issued pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Act regulations.

[2:25:29] Voice 10: Where does it say that?

[2:25:31] Voice 17: This is in the current bylaw, 114.

[2:25:38] Trustee Evans: So the only requirement that we're taking out of there is the vehicle.

[2:25:42] Trustee Evans: Right.

[2:25:42] Trustee Evans: Because otherwise all the vehicles on South Henda are now, according to this,

[2:25:48] Trustee Evans: they are now deemed derelict vehicles.

[2:25:51] Voice 10: Right.

[2:25:52] Voice 10: I understand what we're trying to fix on the thing that the fix can.

[2:25:56] Voice 10: create more problems so you're saying in another place in the

[2:26:00] Trustee Evans: there's there's

[2:26:02] Trustee Evans: there's more to this

[2:26:02] Trustee Evans: section right

[2:26:03] Voice 10: that the page ends here i don't have that so i'm just asking uh the planner is that

[2:26:08] Voice 10: what you're saying you just quoted something there yeah that says specifically that it has to be

[2:26:13] Voice 10: licensed yes that's right so

[2:26:15] Voice 17: right now it says for the purpose of a motor vehicle or for this purpose

[2:26:20] Voice 17: a motor vehicle is unlicensed if it does not display motor vehicle number plates and the

[2:26:28] Voice 17: current license year decal or an interim vehicle license issued pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Act

[2:26:35] Voice 17: regulations. I'm wondering if striking all of A is actually correct because a vehicle could have

[2:26:43] Voice 17: still plates on it but they're expired right so you can say motor vehicle

[2:26:49] Trustee Evans: plates and registration

[2:26:50] Trustee Evans: papers

[2:26:51] Voice 10: i would just say must be registered with icbc i'm sorry we

[2:26:57] Voice 17: could i can come back with

[2:26:58] Voice 17: wording um with help from bylaw enforcement as well i would imagine they're starting to address

[2:27:04] Voice 17: this in other land use bylaws so instead of amending anything now this is another thing

[2:27:09] Voice 17: i'll report back with perfect with wording and ensuring that bylaw enforcement is in agreement

[2:27:14] Voice 17: as well okay perfect okay thank

[2:27:19] Voice 19: you for hanging in there

[2:27:20] Trustee Evans: we got it all right that was it

[2:27:26] Trustee Evans: then

[2:27:28] Voice 19: i have

[2:27:30] Voice 18: nothing else okay trustee folk do you have any um questions or comments or

[2:27:36] Voice 18: discussion points um

[2:27:41] Voice 10: i understand that we're going to come back to this

[2:27:43] Voice 10: we're not we're not done with this point done right correct yeah i

[2:27:49] Voice 18: i mean in in the rest of

[2:27:51] Voice 18: the amendment um the amending bylaw no

[2:27:59] Voice 10: i don't know okay

[2:28:00] Voice 18: so floor area maximum floor area is all

[2:28:03] Voice 18: good um

[2:28:06] Trustee Evans: well we've got a couple of options so we've got new wording after the alr section

[2:28:12] Trustee Evans: well we've got the previously proposed wording so we should maybe have a a discussion on the

[2:28:19] Trustee Evans: the two options and

[2:28:23] Voice 17: through the chair i'm not sure trustee evans if you want to take take the lead on

[2:28:27] Voice 17: this discussion as you had a conversation with rpm robert kojima while i was away um and you two

[2:28:35] Voice 17: worked on this together so you've been more of a background of massaging it to the intent that

[2:28:40] Voice 17: you wanted to achieve um and i'm happy to be here for any technical questions okay i don't

[2:28:48] Trustee Evans: that page printed so i can't look forward oh no i've got that oh yeah that one will do i will

[2:28:54] Trustee Evans: scooch up here can i find the current wording what's the current wording so

[2:29:02] Voice 18: page 54 are we

[2:29:03] Voice 18: talking

[2:29:03] Voice 17: yeah yeah

[2:29:06] Voice 17: it's the proposed wording 53 and 54 and trustee evans is just looking for the

[2:29:12] Voice 17: wording as it currently looks like in the draft bylaw 129 yeah okay okay so

[2:29:25] Voice 19: the current

[2:29:29] Trustee Evans: wording and draft bylaw 129 is on page the bottom of page 57

[2:29:39] Trustee Evans: and that currently states that the total floor overall buildings may not exceed the area in

[2:29:46] Trustee Evans: In column A, the floor area of the dwelling may not exceed the area in column B, despite 515B, for a lot that contained a legal dwelling constructed prior to September 15th.

[2:30:00] Trustee Evans: 2022 that exceeded the floor area in column b the floor area of a replacement reconstructed or altered

[2:30:06] Trustee Evans: dwelling may not exceed the lesser of the floor area of the dwelling on september 15 22 or the

[2:30:12] Trustee Evans: area in column c the wording that i that i was working with um with with um uh staff um

[2:30:24] Trustee Evans: rpm kajima thank you i was going through literally every person i work with

[2:30:33] Trustee Evans: so kim kim was on vacation during this career we did try to connect earlier but it didn't work out

[2:30:39] Trustee Evans: and so i did work with her with her recommendation i did work with him directly

[2:30:44] Trustee Evans: so it got changed a little bit um maximum floor area a remains the same the total floor area of

[2:30:54] Trustee Evans: all buildings per lot may not exceed the area in column A, that remains. Or B, that got changed

[2:31:01] Trustee Evans: from the floor area of a dwelling may not exceed the area in column B to for a lot that has no

[2:31:09] Trustee Evans: dwelling or contains a dwelling with a floor area less than column B, then the maximum area of a new

[2:31:16] Trustee Evans: replacement or altered dwelling may not exceed the floor area in column B. What this achieves

[2:31:23] Trustee Evans: is if you have for example an 800 square foot house you can build it to the maximum in column

[2:31:32] Trustee Evans: b which is the uh revised maximum floor area um for for dwellings per lot area and that

[2:31:45] Trustee Evans: and then for c it removes the word despite so that these become two standalone

[2:31:53] Trustee Evans: loan policies. For a lot that contains a legal dwelling constructed prior to September 15th

[2:32:05] Trustee Evans: that exceeds the area of column B, the floor area of a reconstructed or replacement dwelling may not

[2:32:13] Trustee Evans: exceed the lesser of the floor area in column C, or the floor area of the dwelling on September 15th

[2:32:21] Trustee Evans: or the area in column C. So for an example, if you have a two to four acre property,

[2:32:30] Trustee Evans: column B's maximum floor area is 4,000 square feet. If on September 15th, you had a 3,500

[2:32:39] Trustee Evans: square foot house, you can build it to 4,000. If you had a 5,000 square foot house, you can

[2:32:48] Trustee Evans: rebuild your 5 000 square foot house if you had a 7 000 square foot house you would be

[2:32:56] Trustee Evans: non-compliant as you were under bylaw 114 and

[2:33:04] Voice 17: you could rebuild to 56 and

[2:33:06] Trustee Evans: you could rebuild as per

[2:33:08] Trustee Evans: the um um uh prior to bylaw 122 uh no uh the the local government act the lga um because in there

[2:33:21] Trustee Evans: there is a legal non-conforming protection clause under the LGA that permits you to rebuild

[2:33:28] Trustee Evans: to your same size. By splitting it out this way, it addresses the concerns that seeing as though

[2:33:39] Trustee Evans: the LGA has undergone changes that remove grandfathering potential and something like

[2:33:47] Trustee Evans: that could happen again in the future by having it specified in the bylaw this in this manner

[2:33:55] Trustee Evans: that protection is retained in our bylaw and not reliant on the lga and as much also added was

[2:34:08] Trustee Evans: was where did it go 53 also added was point B which was missing in the current draft

[2:34:22] Trustee Evans: where one where 515ci is applicable this is for a house that was constructed prior to September 15th

[2:34:33] Trustee Evans: 2022 um the local trust committee may require an owner to submit substantive evidence to establish

[2:34:44] Trustee Evans: the size and sighting of the dwelling at the time of adoption of the bylaw so it it has changed a

[2:34:52] Trustee Evans: little bit um but by removing the despite and having these two options um the interpretation

[2:35:09] Trustee Evans: interpretation becomes a little clearer the um the issue that was in the first that the issue

[2:35:17] Trustee Evans: that was currently sitting in bylaw 122 which stated that if you had a house constructed prior

[2:35:26] Trustee Evans: to september 15th you could build no larger than it which then um had the unforeseen circumstance

[2:35:34] Trustee Evans: that if you have an 800 square foot house so it's larger than a cottage it is a house and it was

[2:35:39] Trustee Evans: constructed prior to september 15th you could not build any larger um so that there was just a

[2:35:46] Trustee Evans: couple of things like that any any um concern around those types of things have been um looked

[2:35:53] Trustee Evans: at and tried to be addressed by using this type of language i'm not sure if i've confused people more

[2:36:01] Trustee Evans: um i'm certainly

[2:36:04] Voice 18: confused okay so no no just pause i it's because i don't have the wording

[2:36:11] Voice 18: in front of me and so when you're reading things out it just becomes more and more confusing so i

[2:36:17] Voice 18: don't think explaining anymore what i'd like to clarify is are you seeking to change the intent

[2:36:25] Voice 18: of this draft in front of us today the 50s on page 57 does this does this allow property owners

[2:36:39] Voice 18: to build bigger houses despite the bylaw after february 15th 2022 it just to me it just sounds

[2:36:51] Voice 18: like the house sizes are increasing and increasing and increasing and i honestly am wondering what is

[2:36:57] Voice 18: the point of limiting maximum floor areas if we're just going to allow everybody to build

[2:37:04] Voice 18: as big as they ever were able to build and so i'm really struggling with with this it doesn't

[2:37:09] Voice 18: clarify it it just sounds like you're trying to retain all the ability to rebuild every house as

[2:37:18] Voice 18: big as it ever was so

[2:37:20] Trustee Evans: if you take a look at the wording of leach 53 it's basically i was sitting

[2:37:26] Trustee Evans: with um with with robert kojima and removing the despite clause as was the original intent

[2:37:36] Trustee Evans: so page 53 has sort of the two scenarios that are available building after september 15th

[2:37:49] Trustee Evans: and those that were built prior to september 15th and that is what's that that's what we've

[2:38:00] Trustee Evans: been working on this whole time it's not changed it's got the table as was previously presented

[2:38:12] Voice 18: do you want to take a look at page 53 i'm looking at it we're

[2:38:23] Trustee Evans: not increasing any house sizes

[2:38:25] Trustee Evans: in this except for the resolution that we passed at our last meeting which was to increase the

[2:38:31] Trustee Evans: floor area by 500 square feet and that's retained in the table so if a property has an existing

[2:38:40] Trustee Evans: existing house that

[2:38:45] Voice 19: house is protected I

[2:38:55] Voice 10: I agree that I don't think that we're not changing

[2:38:59] Voice 10: anything at this stage that we haven't already kind of agreed upon that we're adding back 500

[2:39:06] Voice 10: square feet for the house size and what we're actually doing now what we're trying to accomplish

[2:39:15] Voice 10: accomplish is to remove the need for discussion about legally non-conforming.

[2:39:22] Voice 10: And so we're trying to make it more clear,

[2:39:25] Voice 10: which means we have to use a little bit more language.

[2:39:28] Voice 10: These seem like more but

[2:39:30] Voice 10: may seem more complicated, but I think it's actually simpler.

[2:39:35] Voice 10: And it's just

[2:39:37] Voice 10: spelling it out very, very clearly under what circumstances

[2:39:41] Voice 10: chances the house could be rebuilt and what exactly the rules are so that there will be

[2:39:49] Voice 10: no confusion about it and so it's saying the same thing as when we had the you know the original

[2:39:56] Voice 10: draft solved this problem by calling it non-legally non-conforming we had a lot of feedback on that

[2:40:03] Voice 10: not being satisfactory we tried to find a way to work around it and this has been a painstakingly

[2:40:10] Voice 10: I would think process

[2:40:11] Voice 10: is largely responsible for

[2:40:13] Voice 10: is just

[2:40:15] Voice 10: creating a way

[2:40:16] Voice 10: to express it so that

[2:40:18] Voice 10: we don't have to ever

[2:40:20] Voice 10: talk about legally non-conforming because everybody

[2:40:22] Voice 10: conforms and these are the rules

[2:40:24] Voice 10: under which they conform.

[2:40:26] Voice 10: So I don't

[2:40:29] Voice 10: I'm not seeing

[2:40:30] Voice 10: us increasing

[2:40:32] Voice 10: house sizes

[2:40:33] Voice 10: all over the place.

[2:40:35] Voice 10: We've been through this discussion

[2:40:38] Voice 10: for a long time and nothing has been

[2:40:40] Voice 10: added to it or changed yes

[2:40:43] Voice 18: thank you i think it was when um

[2:40:46] Voice 18: uh trustee evans was going into your example of uh sizes it just that confused me so

[2:40:55] Voice 18: stick with what's written and hopefully i can get unconfused cherry elliott

[2:41:04] Voice 17: mm-hmm so there was never a reference to non-conforming in any of these drafts

[2:41:12] Voice 17: there was never a reference there's this idea but it's incorrect there's never a reference

[2:41:19] Voice 17: to non-conformity in any of the regulations that we have put forth in the last four years

[2:41:25] Voice 17: what i'm worrying about is this is constantly getting muddled and more complicated and the

[2:41:34] Voice 17: the ability to interpret is going to be difficult i'm going to be honest we see that with the dvp

[2:41:43] Voice 17: that was just approved staff had to really focus on which regulation for the natural boundary of

[2:41:49] Voice 17: the sea we were regulating you know was it built prior it's is it legal non-conforming

[2:41:55] Voice 17: what are we looking at in a staff my recommendation for the setback to the natural boundary of the sea

[2:42:02] Voice 17: is to delete all of it and establish the natural boundary of the sea to 15 meters yes

[2:42:09] Voice 19: rely on the

[2:42:10] Voice 17: local government act which is there for a reason and if a property owner has to rebuild you come

[2:42:17] Voice 17: forward with a variance i'd imagine a property owner if you're going to rebuild your house with

[2:42:23] Voice 17: the idea of global warming you know the issue with storms you're not going to want to build so

[2:42:30] Voice 17: so close to the natural boundary of the sea. I'm just going to lay it all out right now. I

[2:42:35] Voice 17: understand we are so far in the process that looking back, going back to the natural boundary

[2:42:39] Voice 17: of the sea is probably not the right time. My recommendation is to look at this as the next

[2:42:46] Voice 17: project. But I think the land use bylaw needs to be clear. My recommendation for floor area

[2:42:54] Voice 17: is to remove all the despite remove all of this language and have a new set of maximum floor area

[2:43:01] Voice 17: and rely on the local government app that's staff's recommendation the ltc can make their

[2:43:09] Voice 17: own decisions i just worry that interpreting all this could be confusing i also wanted to mention

[2:43:17] Voice 17: excuse me this is staff's time to comment right i also want to mention there was a comment made

[2:43:23] Voice 17: that if you have a house that's 800 square feet and it was built prior to september 15th

[2:43:29] Voice 17: you have to build to the 800 square feet that's incorrect you would be able it says

[2:43:34] Voice 17: may be constructed so it doesn't say must be constructed so you could build to the new maximum

[2:43:41] Voice 17: floor area as stated in the bylaw yes

[2:43:44] Trustee Evans: so i understand that the thing is after bylaw 122

[2:43:49] Trustee Evans: two came into effect this community was divided absolutely there was a massive issue we are trying

[2:43:58] Trustee Evans: to find a solution whereby this community can have its interests met and respected and while

[2:44:07] Trustee Evans: it may be confusing and difficult for staff this is the best way forward if we were to do your

[2:44:14] Trustee Evans: recommendation what would happen is it would go back to 114 and that would not be appropriate for

[2:44:22] Trustee Evans: the feel for the other members of this community that that really want to have something smaller

[2:44:28] Trustee Evans: represented so based on that if we if we and if we went to 122 too much of this island would become

[2:44:37] Trustee Evans: legally non-conforming so that's a problem so there is the issue of taking a look at it if all

[2:44:45] Trustee Evans: of those despites were removed that would have been a very bad decision made with such a high

[2:44:52] Trustee Evans: percentage of this island becoming instantly legal non-conforming if those despites were removed

[2:44:57] Trustee Evans: right so

[2:44:59] Voice 17: just from my understanding you believe right now by law 114 as it's written that there

[2:45:05] Voice 17: there's issues with non-conformity in terms of floor area?

[2:45:08] Voice 17: What I'm saying is if

[2:45:10] Trustee Evans: all of those despites were removed, right?

[2:45:13] Trustee Evans: So that it was remained at, so if less than an acre was 2,500 square feet.

[2:45:20] Trustee Evans: Yep.

[2:45:21] Trustee Evans: One to two acres was 3,000 square feet.

[2:45:23] Trustee Evans: Yes.

[2:45:24] Trustee Evans: If it was just that.

[2:45:26] Trustee Evans: Yep.

[2:45:26] Trustee Evans: A large, and all those despites were removed.

[2:45:28] Trustee Evans: Yes.

[2:45:29] Trustee Evans: A large percentage of this island would be legal non-conforming.

[2:45:33] Trustee Evans: That's correct.

[2:45:33] Trustee Evans: correct so in order to address that we have to wind up with a messy solution and in order to

[2:45:42] Trustee Evans: address the concerns raised by the community and to bring in clarity to the two options

[2:45:50] Trustee Evans: the work that i did with robert kojima yep was to have them specifically so b is contained c

[2:46:02] Trustee Evans: see is contained. So it's one or the other.

[2:46:06] Voice 17: I agree. I mean, I understand, sorry, I shouldn't

[2:46:08] Voice 17: say I agree. I understand where you're coming from because as a trustee in the LTC, you have

[2:46:13] Voice 17: to balance the wants of the community and also looking at the regulations. I'm just stating my

[2:46:18] Voice 17: professional opinion. This is in a perfect world. This is what I would suggest, right?

[2:46:23] Voice 17: I have to lay

[2:46:26] Voice 17: it on the table just so you know that it's heard. It's absolutely up to the

[2:46:31] Voice 17: the LTC, what the LTC decides to do. I just wanted to make sure that it's clear. If staff

[2:46:38] Voice 17: have a preference, it would be to increase all the limits by 500 square feet and then rely on

[2:46:45] Voice 17: the Local Government Act if that creates situations of legal non-conforming. But I'm

[2:46:50] Voice 17: going to leave it there.

[2:46:53] Trustee Evans: Even if it was increased by 500 square feet, too many properties would

[2:47:00] Trustee Evans: become legal non-conforming it affects too it affects too big of a percentage of the island

[2:47:06] Trustee Evans: to be um classified as a healthy um bible it's it's not good practice to make a large percentage

[2:47:16] Trustee Evans: legal non-conforming we

[2:47:18] Voice 17: don't necessarily have i know that the previous trustees did some number

[2:47:22] Voice 17: crunching based on bc assessment um but staff haven't yet done that assessment um so i can't say

[2:47:30] Voice 17: the number of situations where there could be illegal non-conforming so yeah

[2:47:35] Trustee Evans: and bc assessment

[2:47:37] Trustee Evans: doesn't take into account basement suites and and and um all the other type of things so yeah

[2:47:42] Trustee Evans: absolutely skewed yep that that was that was a big part so i hear you yes i really do i'm i

[2:47:50] Trustee Evans: apologize up front for the amount of work that this is going that this yeah that this situation

[2:47:58] Trustee Evans: has left of them. I'm hoping that this actually provides a little bit more clarity. It either

[2:48:03] Trustee Evans: falls under B or it falls under C. Those are the two scenarios. Recognized, Trustee Falk.

[2:48:13] Voice 10: I just want to add kind of perspective is that, you know, because we've been talking,

[2:48:20] Voice 10: and it isn't messy. What we're proposing isn't messy. It's more detailed. It's more detailed,

[2:48:29] Voice 10: But it is more clear. And I don't know if this has been done in any other LTC, this particular solution to bring what were two tables into one table.

[2:48:42] Voice 10: And I don't know if that's been done. And for us, it's a new way of working.

[2:48:47] Voice 10: And it's a new way to wrap our heads around how we read our particulars in our bylaws.

[2:48:52] Voice 10: I think when we get used to it, I think it would actually be more clear because it's actually quite simple.

[2:48:57] Voice 10: and it's kind of like this follow the line you know you fit you fit here but you don't fit there

[2:49:01] Voice 10: and so i think it takes some careful reading through and it takes some getting used to that

[2:49:06] Voice 10: new way of structuring it but it solves significant issues in our community and i think that's what

[2:49:14] Voice 10: we're here for right so anyway that's all i want to say about that

[2:49:19] Voice 18: okay um interesting discussion

[2:49:29] Voice 18: I have to say, I concur with staff because they are the ones that have to interpret the bylaws, not community members. That is their job. And so we are trying to create a land use bylaw that will live into the future that is clear.

[2:49:50] Voice 18: And I'm hearing that the trustees are wanting to address the discomfort of community members with this perception that they're legal nonconforming. And we've had so much discussion about this. I don't want to go into it again.

[2:50:06] Voice 18: I just want to recognize that when staff give their professional advice about what, under what conditions they can do their job, which is, we need to listen to that.

[2:50:25] Voice 18: And I'm really struggling with the minutiae that we're going into and the contortions to try to satisfy everyone.

[2:50:35] Voice 18: one i just don't think it's going to be productive but my goodness we need to get this project

[2:50:42] Voice 18: finished and move on to work that um is also needed so um trustee evans do you have have you

[2:50:55] Voice 18: passed the wording and made it into a motion that you'd like to put on the floor for debate

[2:50:59] Trustee Evans: i just have a couple of other comments to make first if that's okay go ahead um so earlier we

[2:51:08] Trustee Evans: We had a request from a community member to address, you know, why we're doing this work and what our reasoning is and where we're getting our backing to do this work.

[2:51:24] Trustee Evans: And I would like to point to the mandate as explained in our current trust policy statement.

[2:51:30] Trustee Evans: so the section where it says for the benefit of residents of the trust area in british columbia

[2:51:35] Trustee Evans: generally islands trust is responsible to the present and future residents of both the trust

[2:51:41] Trustee Evans: area and the province of british columbia their needs can only be met and sustained within the

[2:51:46] Trustee Evans: limitations of the natural environment and the island communities of the trust area a balance

[2:51:51] Trustee Evans: must be established between the needs of all stakeholders that's one of the reasons why we're

[2:51:57] Trustee Evans: here again this was a divided community um i'm not going to go into all of the reasons

[2:52:09] Trustee Evans: there was a reduction that was very drastic and that was not um that was not as well supported

[2:52:17] Trustee Evans: as anticipated um variances are have been have been suggested as an alternative to all of those

[2:52:26] Trustee Evans: that need to build larger than may be permitted.

[2:52:32] Trustee Evans: The variance application fee might not be that expensive,

[2:52:37] Trustee Evans: but all the follow-on costs that go with it

[2:52:39] Trustee Evans: do wind up getting very expensive.

[2:52:44] Trustee Evans: So what we are proposing is in line still with the OCP.

[2:52:50] Trustee Evans: It is in line with the mandate.

[2:52:52] Trustee Evans: We are taking all of these elements into consideration.

[2:52:55] Trustee Evans: consideration so we are not doing this without some backing and I just wanted to bring that

[2:53:06] Trustee Evans: forward and if you like I would like to propose the alternate wording as presented on page 53

[2:53:19] Trustee Evans: replace the wording in the draft bylaw.

[2:53:27] Voice 17: So that's as stated in the staff report I believe

[2:53:30] Voice 17: Robert put together the draft motion for you that would incorporate what's in the

[2:53:37] Voice 17: staff report into the new draft bylaw is that right

[2:53:40] Trustee Evans: where does it say that so on

[2:53:44] Voice 17: page 49 of the agenda 1a so you'd be mending section 214 which would amend

[2:53:50] Voice 17: the rural residential zone maximum floor area provisions and replacing the

[2:53:55] Voice 17: maximum floor area provisions with the new maximum floor area provisions as

[2:54:00] Voice 17: presented in the staff report so it would be replacing it with um what was on the page that

[2:54:07] Trustee Evans: that you gave me yeah it's that no

[2:54:14] Voice 17: yeah no it's it's somewhere it's somewhere so it's in the staff

[2:54:20] Voice 17: report on page 53

[2:54:27] Voice 19: 53

[2:54:28] Voice 17: that's

[2:54:32] Trustee Evans: page 53 not the not the not the attachment that comes with the report

[2:54:36] Trustee Evans: That's right. Okay. All right. And if you

[2:54:43] Voice 17: wanted, you can even include that if you wanted to make it super clear that as presented in the staff report on page, you can say even page five of the staff report, because that's actually the page of the staff report.

[2:54:57] Voice 17: okay um

[2:55:02] Voice 15: let me use toby oh here we go there

[2:55:10] Trustee Evans: she is i was just asking if you wanted me to

[2:55:18] Trustee Evans: make the motion as recommended please do okay i move that south panda island local trust committee

[2:55:29] Trustee Evans: amend draft bylaw 129 by a amending section 2.14 which would amend the rural residential zone

[2:55:40] Trustee Evans: maximum floor area provisions and replacing the current floor maximum area provisions with the

[2:55:45] Trustee Evans: new maximum floor area provisions as presented in the staff report on page 5 of the meeting of

[2:55:53] Trustee Evans: of May 2nd, 2025,

[2:55:56] Trustee Evans: B, amending section 2.21,

[2:56:02] Trustee Evans: which would amend the agriculture zone

[2:56:05] Trustee Evans: maximum floor area provisions

[2:56:07] Trustee Evans: and replacing the current maximum floor area provisions

[2:56:11] Trustee Evans: with the new maximum floor area provisions

[2:56:14] Trustee Evans: as presented in the staff report on page five

[2:56:19] Trustee Evans: of the meeting of May 2nd, 2025.

[2:56:22] Trustee Evans: 5, inserting new sections that would amend the forestry and natural resource zones with

[2:56:29] Trustee Evans: the same changes to the maximum floor area as made to the rural, residential, and agricultural

[2:56:35] Trustee Evans: zones, and that the bylaw be renumbered accordingly.

[2:56:40] Voice 19: That was a mouthful.

[2:56:42] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:56:43] Voice 18: Moved.

[2:56:45] Voice 18: Do I have a seconder?

[2:56:46] Voice 9: I'll second that.

[2:56:48] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Falk.

[2:56:49] Voice 18: Discussion on the motion?

[2:56:56] Okay.

[2:57:05] Voice 18: No discussion.

[2:57:07] Voice 18: Anything for me?

[2:57:09] Voice 18: I will call for the vote.

[2:57:12] Voice 18: All those in favour?

[2:57:14] Voice 18: Aye.

[2:57:15] Voice 18: That is carried.

[2:57:20] Voice 18: Would you like me

[2:57:21] Voice 4: to make the

[2:57:22] Voice 18: second motion?

[2:57:23] Voice 18: Honour's Doctor had a comment.

[2:57:25] Voice 18: Oh, sorry.

[2:57:26] Voice 18: No,

[2:57:27] Voice 17: sorry, you can go ahead if you like.

[2:57:28] Voice 17: I was going to mention that you could always give first reading

[2:57:31] Voice 17: at the special meeting, but we need to make sure

[2:57:34] Voice 17: that special meeting was scheduled sometime in June.

[2:57:37] Voice 17: If you do give first reading right now,

[2:57:40] Voice 17: you can still amend the bylaw so you'd amend the bylaw and then give second reading so i just

[2:57:44] Voice 17: wanted to put that out there yeah

[2:57:46] Trustee Evans: i'm happy with that okay go ahead i move that south panda island

[2:57:53] Trustee Evans: local trust committee bylaw number 129 cited as south panda island land use bylaw number 114

[2:58:00] Trustee Evans: for 2016, Amendment Number 1, 2025, be read a first time as amended.

[2:58:08] Trustee Evans: Do

[2:58:12] Voice 18: I have a seconder?

[2:58:14] Voice 9: I'll second that.

[2:58:16] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Falk. Any discussion?

[2:58:22] Voice 10: None for me.

[2:58:24] Voice 18: Okay. So just to state again that first reading means we can formally refer the draft bylaw.

[2:58:32] Voice 18: is that correct and we can always amend it based on feedback that we hear as long as it doesn't

[2:58:41] Voice 18: change the use or density is that right no you

[2:58:46] Voice 17: can still change the oh sorry through the chair

[2:58:48] Voice 17: you can still change use

[2:58:49] Voice 17: and density you just cannot change use and density after the public

[2:58:53] Voice 17: hearing of

[2:58:54] Voice 18: course thank you okay lots of opportunity for comment not that we haven't had

[2:58:59] Voice 17: That's

[2:58:59] Voice 18: plenty. I'll call for the vote. All those in favour?

[2:59:04] Voice 18: Aye.

[2:59:04] Voice 18: Please raise your hand or say aye. That is carried.

[2:59:09] Trustee Evans: May I ask before we get to the third motion, can we review the Trust Policy Statement Directors Only to Bank list that's in here?

[2:59:22] Trustee Evans: I'm not sure I'd like to hear from staff a little bit if that's appropriate.

[2:59:28] Voice 17: absolutely so staff have put together the island's trust policy statement and have reflected

[2:59:34] Voice 17: which policy staff have deemed to be in compliance with or not applicable

[2:59:39] Voice 17: at this time the ltc may want to review that list and make any changes as deemed necessary

[2:59:47] Voice 17: i

[2:59:50] Trustee Evans: didn't have any that i sought to make any changes i just appreciated having this here

[2:59:55] Trustee Evans: Great. I just didn't want to go in there without guests giving us an opportunity.

[3:00:00] Trustee Evans: so

[3:00:05] Voice 17: staff are making the recommendation that the bylaw 129 is not contrary to or at variance with

[3:00:12] Voice 17: the island's trust policy statement that's

[3:00:20] Voice 18: great and if we want to move recommendation number three

[3:00:25] Voice 18: we can discuss but moving

[3:00:35] Voice 4: it now if if you're if you're if you're if you look through it and

[3:00:41] Voice 4: didn't have any changes or no agreements yes

[3:00:52] Voice 10: i'm i'm in agreement that we don't have any

[3:00:57] Voice 10: we're not going against the OCP in that way or the policy statement policy statement okay

[3:01:05] Trustee Evans: then

[3:01:06] Trustee Evans: if it's okay i'll move it i move that the south panda island local trust committee has reviewed

[3:01:13] Trustee Evans: the items of the statement directives only checklist and determine that bylaw 129 is cited

[3:01:20] Trustee Evans: South Panda Island Land Use By-law 1.4.2016 Amendment No. 1.2025

[3:01:28] Trustee Evans: is not contrary to or at variance with the Islands Trust Policy Statement.

[3:01:37] Voice 18: Thank you. Moved by Trustee Evans.

[3:01:40] Voice 18: Do I have a seconder?

[3:01:42] Voice 10: Seconded by

[3:01:43] Voice 18: Trustee Falk.

[3:01:46] Voice 18: Any discussion?

[3:01:49] Voice 18: No, I'm just,

[3:01:50] Trustee Evans: thank you, staff, for going through that.

[3:01:54] Voice 18: that's quite the list

[3:01:56] Voice 18: call for the vote all those in favor that is carried do you like

[3:02:08] Trustee Evans: me to move

[3:02:08] Trustee Evans: the fourth one yes please that south pender island local trust committee requests staff to

[3:02:15] Trustee Evans: schedule a public hearing and community information meeting for bylaw 129 cited as

[3:02:22] Trustee Evans: south pender island land use bylaw number 114 2016 amendment number 1 2025

[3:02:29] Trustee Evans: 25.

[3:02:34] Voice 18: Moved. Do I have a seconder? Seconder.

[3:02:38] Voice 18: Seconder by Trustee Falk. Any discussion?

[3:02:45] Trustee Evans: We were, so in the charter, we were looking at the September meeting for that contract.

[3:02:51] Trustee Evans: Yes. No other discussion from me.

[3:02:55] Voice 18: Sorry. And are these two separate meetings? Community

[3:02:58] Voice 18: information would come before the public hearing?

[3:03:01] Voice 17: That's right. So it'd be at the same meeting,

[3:03:03] Voice 17: but the community information meeting will be prior to so community members have the opportunity

[3:03:08] Voice 17: to ask questions to the ltc and to staff right

[3:03:11] Voice 18: okay that's great

[3:03:19] Voice 18: any more discussion or a call for the vote all those in favor

[3:03:24] Voice 18: and that is carried thank you sure

[3:03:30] Voice 17: ellie oh yeah

[3:03:32] Voice 17: um so a question to the ltc it is tentatively

[3:03:35] Voice 17: scheduled for september 5th as long as the process goes on as planned is there an ideal location

[3:03:43] Voice 17: i fear the room may not be large enough we have built into the budget um as a substantive amount

[3:03:52] Voice 17: to hold it up pop or poets co potentially i know that renting the room is quite expensive

[3:03:58] Voice 17: so there is an opportunity well there is an option to hold it on north pender so i just

[3:04:04] Voice 17: wanted to bring that up as discussion you don't have to make the decision right now

[3:04:08] Voice 17: but if you'd like to

[3:04:09] Voice 4: that's

[3:04:10] Voice 17: helpful and then we can start tentatively scheduling it um i would

[3:04:15] Trustee Evans: be in preference of having it at the anglican church again that is a much um more cost effective

[3:04:22] Trustee Evans: um option for us i know that it is on north panda but we won't have the dip issue and we

[3:04:29] Trustee Evans: won't have the bridge issue in september so god well i don't even go there um so i think that it

[3:04:38] Trustee Evans: won't have the same barriers that the previous meeting had i've

[3:04:44] Voice 10: gotten something back some

[3:04:46] Voice 10: people don't like it you know north and we want to be on south pender it seems to be a minority but

[3:04:52] Voice 10: i don't know like we have a choice between adequate space spending a whole lot of money

[3:05:00] Voice 10: or going you know being off the island an

[3:05:03] Trustee Evans: adequate space for very little money so yeah

[3:05:06] Trustee Evans: I

[3:05:06] Voice 10: don't feel like we have enough feedbacks saying they're unhappy with it to achieve

[3:05:14] Voice 10: of course that's my feeling unfortunately I'd love it if we could have it at post-covid

[3:05:21] Voice 10: wins to

[3:05:21] Voice 15: do it

[3:05:22] Voice 15: but

[3:05:24] Voice 10: in the hotel

[3:05:26] Voice 15: argue with

[3:05:29] Voice 10: some that they should charge less rent yeah

[3:05:33] Trustee Evans: and september does tend to be a very

[3:05:36] Trustee Evans: busy season for poets cove with weddings so that space is right it's going to the the opportunity

[3:05:42] Trustee Evans: for space is very limited and it'll be prime rate

[3:05:47] Voice 17: so only we could have an employee deal

[3:06:00] Voice 14: can we

[3:06:01] Voice 10: try for

[3:06:07] Voice 18: the anglican church again yeah is that an option yes can

[3:06:11] Voice 1: we try for the anglican

[3:06:12] Voice 18: church yes great all right so one final motion um anybody i

[3:06:24] Voice 10: think i should make it

[3:06:26] Voice 18: jump in there

[3:06:28] Voice 10: let's end on a south bender i local trust committee request to have to schedule

[3:06:34] Voice 10: an electronic special meeting for the minor lub amendments project to review bylaw amendments

[3:06:41] Voice 10: this from may 2nd 2025 meeting and to hold community information meeting i'll second

[3:06:49] Voice 18: excellent seconded by trustee evans any discussion okay

[3:06:55] Voice 22: my

[3:06:56] Voice 18: only request is that

[3:06:58] Voice 18: june is extremely packed so what is our timing actually early june yeah i'm not available

[3:07:12] Voice 18: available from the 12th to the 15th and do we need to have it on a friday

[3:07:20] Voice 18: could

[3:07:20] Voice 17: we pass the motion first and then have a quick discussion because i do have some date

[3:07:24] Voice 17: possibilities i

[3:07:25] Voice 18: don't know if you want to make

[3:07:26] Voice 17: those now we

[3:07:28] Voice 14: don't have to

[3:07:28] Voice 17: build the date into

[3:07:29] Voice 17: the motion i'd rather not because it gives us that

[3:07:31] Voice 17: flexibility all right so

[3:07:34] Voice 18: i'll call for the vote

[3:07:35] Voice 18: all those in favor that is carried thank you so some options there planners talk to

[3:07:41] Voice 18: So

[3:07:42] Voice 17: I agree that June is quite busy. And I don't know if the LTC has preference on a Friday. This isn't an electronic meeting. So there are options for the evening, weekend. But if you wanted to keep it on a Friday, Friday, July 4th could be an option. Or we could do it in the evening on another day, whatever the LTC may think. June is very busy.

[3:08:08] Voice 17: see yeah I'm I'm I don't have any availability in June so I my preference would be the first

[3:08:15] Voice 17: week or two of July no later than that I can do

[3:08:19] Voice 17: July 4th and would that be during

[3:08:24] Voice 17: the

[3:08:25] Trustee Evans: same hours I'm open currently I'm open on July 4th so it'd be better for me if I could

[3:08:30] Trustee Evans: have a date early enough that I can make sure that I don't wind up with other commitments

[3:08:35] Trustee Evans: sneaking in there okay would

[3:08:39] Voice 17: july 4th work for you chair elliott yes it

[3:08:42] Voice 17: does trustee fault yeah

[3:08:45] Voice 17: we'll tentatively put it in for july 4th okay that's great thank you

[3:08:51] Voice 17: ltc so

[3:08:54] Voice 17: to wrap up

[3:08:56] Voice 17: this discussion i'm not saying that there may be further items the ltc

[3:09:00] Voice 17: want to discuss but in terms of staff our next steps are to send referrals out for the proposed

[3:09:09] Voice 17: bylaw 129 and we will schedule a special electronic meeting we hope to do that in the next

[3:09:16] Voice 17: week or two lisa will be working on that and we will to tentatively schedule the community

[3:09:22] Voice 17: information meeting and public hearing for the september 5th ltc meeting sounds

[3:09:31] Voice 18: great we are

[3:09:33] Voice 18: are moving along thank you uh trustees and thank you staff for great advice and getting us to this

[3:09:39] Voice 18: place so i believe that concludes the business of the land use bylaw amendment project

[3:09:49] Voice 18: and so returning to our agenda um i will check in do we need a break or is everyone doing okay

[3:09:57] Voice 18: Okay. There's not too much

[3:09:59] Voice 18: left to

[3:10:00] Voice 18: consider.

[3:10:01] Voice 17: We do have some

[3:10:02] Voice 17: room for an

[3:10:04] Voice 17: in-camera discussion.

[3:10:06] Voice 17: So

[3:10:06] Voice 18: I think if we just

[3:10:08] Voice 18: keep going.

[3:10:09] Voice 15: Okay.

[3:10:12] Voice 18: So the work program reports

[3:10:14] Voice 18: are attached, section 16.

[3:10:17] Voice 18: We are going to have discussion on

[3:10:18] Voice 18: future projects, so that could be

[3:10:20] Voice 18: amended.

[3:10:22] Voice 18: The applications report,

[3:10:25] Voice 18: trustee local expense report,

[3:10:28] Voice 18: I would just note on item 16.3, I had, we've heard from director of, what is it now, financial and human relations?

[3:10:42] Voice 18: No, financial and HR.

[3:10:45] Voice 18: Anyway, used to be administrative services, totally gapped.

[3:10:48] Voice 18: But she stated that the LTCs might be more involved with the planning of the budgets of their local trust committee meetings.

[3:11:01] Voice 18: And we're not sure what the plan is for that, whether that'll come through a report from the RPMs to the local trust committee to make decisions.

[3:11:12] Voice 18: And that would be, you know, how many meetings per year, locations and that so that they used to be made sort of as a general budget, a bucket, but we can get more detailed and specific with the LTC's needs and requests.

[3:11:30] Voice 18: So, anything on 16.4, Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions?

[3:11:43] Voice 18: Not for me.

[3:11:45] Voice 18: The Local Trust Committee webpage.

[3:11:49] Voice 18: And we come to 16.6, Reconciliation and First Nations Relationship Building.

[3:11:56] Voice 18: And we have correspondence.

[3:11:58] Voice 18: We actually have two pieces.

[3:12:03] Voice 18: Correspondence on page 75 here.

[3:12:06] Voice 18: came to us with a specific request. So we're going to consider that. And then a report from

[3:12:14] Voice 18: Monica and Paul Petrie came just to the LTC. And I understand that Monica is going to read that out.

[3:12:25] Voice 18: And actually, we would need you to read it into the minutes, as we can't attach reports sort of

[3:12:31] Voice 18: after the agenda has been published, but we can certainly read it into the minutes and have it

[3:12:35] Voice 18: recorded that way. So, let's address 16.6, the correspondence requesting that the LTC consider,

[3:12:48] Voice 18: well, a few things. So, first of all, I want to thank the letter writers. Again, Paul and Monica,

[3:12:55] Voice 18: you do great work to community relationship building. What I read in this letter is a few

[3:13:02] Voice 18: you request to potentially reconsider the statement from the Wasaytnich elders

[3:13:15] Voice 18: that was received after By-law 123 had gone through public hearing

[3:13:22] Voice 18: and potentially reconsider By-law 123, which would amend the OCP

[3:13:30] Voice 18: and by adding a reconciliation and rights and relationship foreground.

[3:13:41] Voice 18: So that's one request.

[3:13:44] Voice 18: And the second was that it would be respectful to invite WSATENich representatives to attend this meeting

[3:13:57] Voice 18: to receive and consider their views on Bylaw 129 or Draft Bylaw 129.

[3:14:04] Voice 18: and uh and so i did respond to to paul and monica i had to get some advice from staff

[3:14:14] Voice 18: basically because i didn't want to confuse the formal referral process that we refer a draft

[3:14:23] Voice 18: by which is we're now in that stage of referring a draft bylaw to um every body that is whose

[3:14:31] Voice 18: whose interests or rights could be impacted by that bylaw.

[3:14:36] Voice 18: And so the Wasaytnech Leadership Council would receive a copy of this,

[3:14:41] Voice 18: or this bylaw would be referred to them for comment.

[3:14:44] Voice 18: And through their own process, they would consider with those they have in place for that.

[3:14:51] Voice 18: But I don't think that affects or would challenge

[3:14:56] Voice 18: challenge uh having wassainich elders come to the ltc and speak of their own accord

[3:15:04] Voice 18: um on any matter really uh respecting their views and interests and

[3:15:10] Voice 18: um relationship to the land so i had said they would absolutely be welcome

[3:15:19] Voice 18: and to speak to and address the ltc matter just as uh anyone is welcome to do so

[3:15:27] Voice 18: But also suggested that perhaps their comments might be, it might be a good opportunity in the public hearing process when we reach that stage, because then their comments and views would be recorded in the public hearing binder.

[3:15:45] Voice 18: And that's a bit more of a formal record that stands accompanying the bylaw amendment.

[3:15:52] Voice 18: So we did have that discussion, and I just wanted to open the floor.

[3:15:56] Voice 18: Trustees, do you have any comments or reflections on this correspondence?

[3:16:03] Voice 18: Yes, Trustee Evans.

[3:16:07] Trustee Evans: I really do appreciate this request coming forward with regards to the wording going back into the OCP.

[3:16:15] Trustee Evans: In By-law 123, there were two separate items in there.

[3:16:20] Trustee Evans: and when we looked at this and we we didn't approve it as was stated then those two elements

[3:16:31] Trustee Evans: needed to be separated so when we do come back to take a look at this we can look at this one piece

[3:16:39] Trustee Evans: and also with the trust policy statement being so close to coming out for a public review

[3:16:48] Trustee Evans: you um and once that is passed it's on schedule hopefully um for next year then all of the ocps

[3:17:02] Trustee Evans: will have to be brought in line with the with the policy statement which has a lot of first

[3:17:07] Trustee Evans: nations reconciliation elements to it as well so this could all be done at the same time under

[3:17:14] Trustee Evans: under a larger project. If we do take on another project that is going to address the OCP then this

[3:17:22] Trustee Evans: can also be put in as part of the project charter to do it at the same time. So that depending on

[3:17:29] Trustee Evans: what project we take on after this there may be an opportunity to move this piece up earlier

[3:17:36] Trustee Evans: and if not then it can go in with the other OCP review element is what I'm thinking. So those

[3:17:43] Trustee Evans: were my thoughts as I was looking at this.

[3:17:50] Voice 18: Thank you. Any thoughts on this, Trustee Falk?

[3:17:57] Voice 18: Not that you have

[3:17:58] Voice 10: to. No, no, I have nothing to add.

[3:18:04] Voice 18: So yes, I think consideration of a project to update the OCP, including the opportunity for

[3:18:14] Voice 18: or a proper recognition by the St. Niche peoples in that is definitely a worthy project this LTC might consider.

[3:18:29] Voice 18: And I would invite Paul and Monica, if you want to invite the elders to any meetings or the public hearing to give their views,

[3:18:44] Voice 18: I would certainly support that.

[3:18:45] Voice 18: I just my caution is that because it's not part of our referral process there isn't budget for

[3:18:57] Voice 18: handshakes and travel and support for elders and I don't know if that's the expectation

[3:19:05] Voice 18: but I can also inquire of staff if if that support is needed could we draw from another

[3:19:14] Voice 18: other budget in the islands trust if that would be necessary but i think at this time the advice

[3:19:19] Voice 18: i'd been getting was um it would be more than we could accommodate so um but we welcome them

[3:19:36] Voice 18: at any point and we'll do our absolute best to to hear and consider um their views on uh this very

[3:19:45] Voice 18: very important cultural protocol and the way that they consider the land and the ecosystems.

[3:19:54] Voice 18: So thank you for the letter. And so I'll turn to Monica. Are you in the meeting?

[3:20:04] Voice 12: And

[3:20:04] Voice 18: would you mind reading out that letter? So this is a letter of May. I think it just came

[3:20:12] Voice 18: to us a few days ago. And you wanted to give an update. And thank you so much for providing these.

[3:20:18] Voice 18: they're really valuable yes

[3:20:22] Voice 13: thank you um so this is regarding reconciliation and first nations

[3:20:28] Voice 13: building so just last tuesday april 29th the wissanich elders council selwayne the

[3:20:37] Voice 13: elders council yeah we're on this deus pender island to witness the installation of the

[3:20:43] Voice 13: wissanich territorial map at the pender school this is the map that was shared with trustees

[3:20:49] Voice 13: and community members at the January meeting

[3:20:53] Voice 13: by Hereditary Chief Eric Pelkey.

[3:20:57] Voice 13: So Chief Pelkey presented the map

[3:20:59] Voice 13: to Pender School Principal Margot Landau

[3:21:01] Voice 13: in a traditional Hussainic cultural ceremony

[3:21:04] Voice 13: witnessed by the following five elders.

[3:21:09] Voice 13: Ganim, Eric Pelkey himself,

[3:21:12] Voice 13: Jacincton, John Elliott,

[3:21:14] Voice 13: Celilia, Belinda Claxton,

[3:21:16] Voice 13: Kosinia, Belinda Elliott,

[3:21:18] Voice 13: and Sex Flatten, Earl Claxton, Jr.

[3:21:24] Voice 13: They were all present and they are all residents

[3:21:28] Voice 13: of either Seau or Zagreb Reserves.

[3:21:31] Voice 13: The leadership of School District 64 also participated

[3:21:36] Voice 13: in this important day of cultural event,

[3:21:39] Voice 13: including District Superintendent and CEO, Joe Jensen,

[3:21:43] Voice 13: Regional Principal, Adrian Pendergast,

[3:21:48] Voice 13: Trustee Greg Lucas and District Indigenous Education Coordinator Lorna Fraser, and there

[3:21:56] Voice 13: were other district representations and staff. The full student body participated in the event

[3:22:04] Voice 13: of the Vendors' Game and learned the importance of the witnessing ceremony for maintaining and

[3:22:09] Voice 13: protecting oral history and sharing traditional knowledge, that is the people called upon to be

[3:22:18] Voice 13: The witnesses and those with the elders are paid 50 cents for their witnessing to be present.

[3:22:31] Voice 13: And they are called upon to remember this event because it was in a world for different society and to be able to testify to it at any other time.

[3:22:46] Voice 13: So the map installation event included a full day engagement with the grade seven class from

[3:22:53] Voice 13: the Tender School and the grade seven Sanchothan Immersion class from the Sainich Tribal School.

[3:23:01] Voice 13: A highlight of the installation event was the cultural drumming, singing, and dance presentation

[3:23:08] Voice 13: by the St. Joplin Immersion Class,

[3:23:11] Voice 13: led by the San Antonio worker,

[3:23:16] Voice 13: Skitsilisia Renee Simpson.

[3:23:19] Voice 13: And that was just spectacular.

[3:23:24] Voice 13: Before leaving for the ferry,

[3:23:26] Voice 13: the Selvan met with the

[3:23:28] Voice 13: Plague Chess Reconciliation Action Team,

[3:23:31] Voice 13: which we're a part of,

[3:23:32] Voice 13: to provide guidance for the next two installations on Stais.

[3:23:36] Voice 13: An installation at the Community Hall Grounds and one by Brooks Point Regional Park.

[3:23:44] Voice 13: So those are to come.

[3:23:48] The

[3:23:51] Voice 13: map installation event was coordinated by the Religious Reconciliation Tool in partnership

[3:23:57] Voice 13: with the Kennedy School, the Los Angeles Tribal School, the Los Angeles Leadership Council

[3:24:02] Voice 13: and supported by a grant from the Real Estate Foundation of BC.

[3:24:08] Voice 13: And if I may, I would just like to say, for me,

[3:24:11] Voice 13: the highlight of the day was the kids of the grade 7 classes

[3:24:16] Voice 13: from each of the schools spending time together,

[3:24:20] Voice 13: getting to know each other, eating lunch together,

[3:24:24] Voice 13: and then having free time.

[3:24:25] Voice 13: They all walked down to Medicine Beach

[3:24:27] Voice 13: and just had time to be together and explore

[3:24:31] Voice 13: and get to know each other.

[3:24:33] Voice 13: And I think these kinds of initiatives

[3:24:38] Voice 13: for an experiences for the school children

[3:24:41] Voice 13: are so important in carrying forward

[3:24:45] Voice 13: the goals of reconciliation between our peoples.

[3:24:50] Voice 13: Thank you.

[3:24:52] Voice 19: Thank you.

[3:24:54] Trustee Evans: Apologies for choking.

[3:24:55] Trustee Evans: Apparently

[3:24:56] Voice 19: I can't drink either.

[3:24:57] Voice 19: them

[3:24:57] Trustee Evans: and the harder I try to suppress it the worse it got.

[3:25:04] Voice 18: Thank you so much Monica and Paul

[3:25:07] Voice 18: for not just this report but your continued work and engagement and this is so good to hear

[3:25:15] Voice 18: especially that the children are involved and coming together and learning it makes my heart

[3:25:24] Voice 18: so happy and so thank you so much for this report and all the work you do thank

[3:25:32] Voice 13: you okay

[3:25:36] Voice 18: so we are

[3:25:41] Voice 18: now at um we've got an islands trust conservancy report uh dated february 2025 it's a little bit

[3:25:49] Voice 18: dated um i can say i believe that the letters to first nations um actually i shouldn't say that i

[3:26:00] Voice 18: I can't confirm that they've gone out yet.

[3:26:02] Voice 18: So we are engaging on the update to the five-year plan, which is a requirement.

[3:26:10] Voice 18: And we are still continuing on the old plan, but the minister had requested that the Conservancy

[3:26:18] Voice 18: do a deeper dive and engage with First Nations in the Trust area on the, not just the plan

[3:26:26] Voice 18: and management but the the philosophy of of conservation going forward and we're having

[3:26:30] Voice 18: some pretty deep conversations uh executive committee and um islands trust conservancy

[3:26:36] Voice 18: meet about three times a year we just had our joint meeting on um april 23rd and we discussed

[3:26:47] Voice 18: at that time um there's interest in developing a um how do you call it sort of a taxed a fund

[3:26:59] Voice 18: for conservation um that might be managed by the islands trust and first nations and um so this is

[3:27:07] Voice 18: very very early days of of thinking about what that might look like but it's sort of modeled

[3:27:12] Voice 18: on something the capital regional district is um has been working on for a number of years so

[3:27:17] Voice 18: So conservancy is asking lots of big questions and it's slow work because it really gets at the essence of land use management in the trust area.

[3:27:35] Voice 18: So let's go to new business. 17.1, we've got to approve, we've got a request for a decision on our submission to the annual report.

[3:27:43] Voice 18: And so turning page 80, these are very brief sections that just detail what occurred in the last year.

[3:27:56] Voice 18: And it's a requirement to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs that an annual report be submitted.

[3:28:02] Voice 18: So this is the wording for the South Bender Island Local Trust Committee.

[3:28:11] Voice 18: Are we all good? Do we want to approve the attached text?

[3:28:21] Voice 10: Yeah, I can move that the South Bender Island Local Trust Committee approves the attached text for inclusion in the 2024-25 annual report for approval by Trust Council and the City of New England's Federal Housing and Municipal Affairs.

[3:28:35] Voice 10: Second that.

[3:28:37] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Evans. Any discussion? All those in favor, raise your hand or say aye. That is carried. Thank you.

[3:28:44] Voice 18: So one item of new business, 17.2, consideration of future projects.

[3:28:51] Voice 18: Trustee Evans, did you want to lead that discussion here?

[3:28:56] Trustee Evans: Sure.

[3:28:58] Trustee Evans: Seeing as though we are getting close to the end of this project,

[3:29:04] Trustee Evans: I thought it might be appropriate to start discussing what new project

[3:29:07] Trustee Evans: we can start looking towards and potentially asking staff to look at creating a project

[3:29:17] Trustee Evans: charter so that by the time this gets through to its conclusion, we'll have approximately a

[3:29:25] Trustee Evans: year left in our term. One item that was actually raised earlier as well in the town hall

[3:29:36] Trustee Evans: was when Bill 35 came into effect

[3:29:40] Trustee Evans: with regards to STVRs,

[3:29:44] Trustee Evans: it took away the grandfathering

[3:29:46] Trustee Evans: of the use of STVRs in our community.

[3:29:51] Trustee Evans: When the STVRs were removed

[3:29:54] Trustee Evans: as a permitted use in our bylaws,

[3:29:59] Trustee Evans: it was...

[3:30:00] Trustee Evans: under the expectation that the existing 20-odd STPRs would be able to continue

[3:30:07] Trustee Evans: under their grandfathered position and when Bill 35 came out it took that away.

[3:30:15] Trustee Evans: We currently have a standing resolution not to enforce on that with the understanding that we

[3:30:21] Trustee Evans: will come back to this in a timely manner to look at how we can address this particular issue

[3:30:31] Trustee Evans: while retaining what was intended by the previous trustees that these properties retain their

[3:30:39] Trustee Evans: ability to have the STVR business within them. I'm hoping that we'll be able to find a

[3:30:47] Trustee Evans: a swift resolution to this and that we'll be able to deal with it within

[3:30:53] Trustee Evans: the nine months period that we will likely have. I'm hoping that we can have a discussion and

[3:31:01] Trustee Evans: get this, get this one piece dealt with. So I would like to propose that we have the review

[3:31:14] Trustee Evans: of the STVR policies and regulations as our next minor project. We have the opportunity as well of

[3:31:22] Trustee Evans: having a major project, which can include OCP amendments. So if that's something that we would

[3:31:32] Trustee Evans: like to consider starting but any major project would flow into the next term so i wanted to open

[3:31:39] Trustee Evans: the floor for a brief discussion now on which way we would like to go because anything to do with

[3:31:48] Trustee Evans: the stv so anything to do with the ocp has to go through the minister as well and and that in and

[3:31:54] Trustee Evans: of itself will take approximately six months so at this point i'm kind of leaning just to having a

[3:32:02] Trustee Evans: small minor project once the trust policy statement is completed which will be in about

[3:32:09] Trustee Evans: another year or so the OCP will be undergoing a lot more scrutiny and quite a few changes I'm

[3:32:16] Trustee Evans: anticipating I'm not sure what's buzzing apparently so

[3:32:25] Voice 16: much as always okay

[3:32:26] Trustee Evans: so I would

[3:32:29] Trustee Evans: I would be more inclined to hold the OCP changes for the next term and deal with the STBRs and

[3:32:38] Trustee Evans: other smaller related items as our next project. Opening the floor for discussion.

[3:32:46] Voice 18: Good discussion. Yeah. Lots to consider.

[3:32:52] Voice 10: Yeah, I think that makes sense. I mean, to me,

[3:32:55] Voice 10: it's a new sense before our term is over, we should tie it up. And this is definitely

[3:33:01] Voice 10: be something that is kind of it will be in limbo if we don't deal with it before the end of our

[3:33:07] Voice 10: term so we shouldn't deal with it um the definition of swift being nine months is a disappointment

[3:33:15] Voice 10: but

[3:33:16] Voice 14: i guess

[3:33:20] Voice 10: i'm learning right so it should it to me seems like a meeting

[3:33:25] Voice 10: a little bit of prep work have it on the agenda maybe some background we should be able to

[3:33:30] Voice 10: to actually solve this in one meeting but that's my optimism yeah

[3:33:37] Trustee Evans: and i think i think because this

[3:33:39] Trustee Evans: was an unanticipated regulation that came through government that has had a major impact on the

[3:33:46] Trustee Evans: stvrs

[3:33:47] Voice 15: and

[3:33:48] Trustee Evans: their operations on this island and yes having the stvrs is something that is also

[3:33:53] Trustee Evans: supportive of the mandate by keeping the islands accessible to the rest of british colombians to

[3:34:00] Trustee Evans: come and enjoy um the only other the only other accommodation that we have on south pender now

[3:34:06] Trustee Evans: is uh poets cove which some people might find reasonable other people may find it expensive

[3:34:17] Trustee Evans: um so i think it's just good to have the options so

[3:34:29] Voice 10: do we make a motion i

[3:34:30] Voice 18: don't know do we need

[3:34:31] Trustee Evans: to make them

[3:34:32] Voice 18: if

[3:34:33] Voice 10: you

[3:34:34] Voice 18: want to prioritize one over the other then is that what you're saying that

[3:34:39] Voice 18: you would prioritize a review of stvr policies and regulations um on the future projects list

[3:34:47] Voice 18: that we identify

[3:34:49] Trustee Evans: this as our next minor project and ask staff to start on a to start reviewing

[3:34:59] Trustee Evans: a project charter so that we are ready to get started at the conclusion of this and i'm seeing

[3:35:05] Trustee Evans: like nods beside me yep staff

[3:35:10] Voice 18: can you start a project charter before we finish the current one

[3:35:14] Voice 17: um so you're at an interesting time where staff can certainly start pulling together

[3:35:21] Voice 17: information on the next project um with that i can put together a scope and timeline and so forth

[3:35:28] Voice 17: um i just want to make sure that after the special meeting that this project's actually

[3:35:37] Voice 17: coming to you know a closure but with the ltc scheduling um a cim and public hearing i think

[3:35:43] Voice 17: that we are getting to that point so i think um if ltc were to give or put together a motion

[3:35:50] Voice 17: motion, you can direct staff to report back with options for short-term vacation rentals as a minor

[3:36:03] Voice 17: project. And you can say and draft a project charter. I think that's fair. We also would want

[3:36:16] Voice 17: to move this item. So it's currently number seven on the future projects report. You'd want to move

[3:36:23] Voice 17: it on to your minor sorry your projects what's it called yeah the active projects and if this

[3:36:35] Voice 12: is

[3:36:35] Voice 17: something the ltc wants to do just so the ltc is aware this could involve i'd imagine it involve

[3:36:44] Voice 17: amendments to the land use bylaw potentially to the ocp as well yeah so um but that's okay

[3:36:51] Voice 17: yeah that's why that's

[3:36:53] Trustee Evans: that's that's the whole point of having some review done in advance

[3:36:59] Trustee Evans: that when we do get to absolutely start on this that we're actually

[3:37:04] Voice 17: so yeah so staff would be

[3:37:08] Voice 17: looking for a motion to move the review of short-term vacation rentals policies and regulations

[3:37:15] Voice 17: to the active projects report so you're moving that up to as an active project and then you'd

[3:37:25] Voice 17: be requesting staff to um report back with further information on this project and a draft

[3:37:34] Voice 17: project charter and i think that over the summer months july and august that's something that i

[3:37:40] Voice 17: I can achieve.

[3:37:45] Voice 18: And this would,

[3:37:46] Voice 18: yep, go ahead. This would time well,

[3:37:49] Voice 17: if we do schedule a CIM

[3:37:51] Voice 17: and public hearing for September 5th. After that, the draft bottle 129 starts going through the

[3:37:58] Voice 17: process of going to EC and then coming back to the LTC for approval. So really there's not much

[3:38:05] Voice 17: work for staff to complete after the public hearing is done. So if the LTC really wants

[3:38:12] Voice 17: to get this project going in terms of staff's capacity,

[3:38:15] Voice 17: I think it's fair that staff can then start moving on

[3:38:18] Voice 17: with this project in the fall.

[3:38:21] So

[3:38:26] Voice 18: I hear the interest in the LTC

[3:38:28] Voice 18: in cleaning up this area of now

[3:38:34] Voice 18: the affected legal non-conforming vacation rentals.

[3:38:39] Voice 18: I do wonder whether the OCP review

[3:38:44] Voice 18: review that had been started and nearly completed and then was set aside by the LTC at the start of

[3:38:52] Voice 18: this term, how much work would a project like that entail? Planner Stockdale, something I'm

[3:39:00] Voice 18: more interested in, to be honest. But I guess my question is, can any of that,

[3:39:09] Voice 18: any of those reports and the engagement that was done be revived or does that whole project just

[3:39:17] Voice 18: essentially die because that consideration of an OCP update was set aside?

[3:39:28] Voice 17: Yes as Trustee Evans

[3:39:29] Voice 17: had mentioned that project the OCP project involved two aspects the First Nations acknowledgement at

[3:39:35] Voice 17: the beginning of the ocp and then the separate um appendix regarding um i can't remember the

[3:39:42] Trustee Evans: land

[3:39:42] Voice 17: and site is building and guidelines

[3:39:44] Voice 17: so we would be starting at the very beginning i'd imagine

[3:39:48] Voice 17: the focus would be first nations related and if it is first nations we want to make sure that we

[3:39:54] Voice 17: start at the very beginning and ensure that we're um we're having that early engagement with first

[3:40:01] Voice 17: Nations that wasn't necessarily done with the previous process. So if the LTC would like the

[3:40:07] Voice 17: next project to be a review of the OCP in terms of First Nations acknowledgement statement or

[3:40:14] Voice 17: addition of policies, that would be at least a few years with the beginning of the project having

[3:40:21] Voice 17: quite a heavy First Nations engagement and relationship building at the beginning. So

[3:40:26] Voice 17: it's something that we would want to start fresh on and not necessarily use anything that was done

[3:40:30] Voice 17: in the past.

[3:40:33] Trustee Evans: And what I'm trying to do here is I'm trying to find something that we can

[3:40:38] Trustee Evans: get through before the end of our term. And with regards to the First Nations aspect,

[3:40:44] Trustee Evans: with regards to the OCP, I would like to tie it into the trust policy statement

[3:40:49] Trustee Evans: changes that are going to be flowing down as well. I think that that would be a little bit

[3:40:56] Trustee Evans: more efficient effective use of engagement with first nations if we provide every package versus

[3:41:04] Trustee Evans: here's one piece here's the next piece here's the next piece i i do want to i do want to be

[3:41:13] Trustee Evans: respectful of the amount of time these requests take as well and as plan of stockdale said this

[3:41:21] Trustee Evans: This will be a few years' worth of work.

[3:41:25] Trustee Evans: This is not going to be something short.

[3:41:27] Trustee Evans: So if we're going to start the engagement process,

[3:41:31] Trustee Evans: seeing as though we are getting closer to the first reading

[3:41:35] Trustee Evans: of the trust policy statement as well,

[3:41:37] Trustee Evans: I think that would be better timing.

[3:41:41] Trustee Evans: And then having that as a major project.

[3:41:45] Voice 18: I do think there's actually value in starting it as a major project,

[3:41:48] Voice 18: this term, because it's going to take a few years.

[3:41:54] Voice 18: um early engagement is needed and we do still have some reconciliation grant money

[3:42:02] Voice 18: that might be used for pre-engagement so i don't think it's out of um out of the realm of

[3:42:12] Voice 18: possibility to put in a request i think we'd need to see it in by june or july for a major project

[3:42:21] Voice 18: that would start next year for pre-engagement

[3:42:26] Voice 18: in the South Pender OCP,

[3:42:30] Voice 18: knowing that the OCP needs to change anyways

[3:42:34] Voice 18: when the policy statement is adopted, right?

[3:42:39] Voice 18: But starting the work with pre-engagement

[3:42:41] Voice 18: with First Nations is a necessary step anyways.

[3:42:47] Voice 18: So I would actually want to see that one

[3:42:51] Voice 18: as a request for a major project.

[3:42:54] Voice 18: And it might only be, you know, $5,000 and beginning the conversation with the elders as was requested.

[3:43:05] Voice 20: I'm

[3:43:06] Trustee Evans: going to look to plan a stock deal if we don't have something.

[3:43:11] Trustee Evans: So by the time the trust policy statement has gone through first reading, by the time I get to next year, we'll be getting close to second and third reading on the trust policy statement.

[3:43:25] Trustee Evans: statement so we we won't we won't have it in our hand yet because it's still got to go through the

[3:43:31] Trustee Evans: minister right to come back with a trust policy statement which will be the actual work that

[3:43:38] Trustee Evans: will be asking for first nations so in sort of like the last um six months of our term

[3:43:45] Trustee Evans: if we were to start engaging with first nations what would it be appropriate to go and start

[3:43:51] Trustee Evans: engagement without anything to engage with like to say yeah um

[3:43:56] Trustee Evans: this is this is what we're hoping

[3:43:58] Trustee Evans: to bring to you but rather just going and saying we just we just want to open communications like

[3:44:07] Trustee Evans: what's how like what yeah

[3:44:11] Trustee Evans: what do we do so

[3:44:12] Voice 17: we're we're in a similar situation with the

[3:44:14] Voice 17: galliano ltc they're working on a minor project but they're thinking of doing a targeted ocp

[3:44:21] Voice 17: review next fiscal. So 2026, 2027. So they're actually putting together their business case

[3:44:27] Voice 17: right now, which has to be approved early September for it to be built into the trust

[3:44:32] Voice 17: council budget. And so what we decided was the project's not started, but we're going to send

[3:44:39] Voice 17: out early, early engagement letters, just letting First Nations know that this project is most

[3:44:46] Voice 17: likely going to move forward and what type of level of involvement they would like to be

[3:44:50] Voice 17: included in or what topics are of interest so if the south pender ltc is thinking of something

[3:44:57] Voice 17: similar you'd be requesting staff to put a business case together summer of next year

[3:45:04] Voice 17: spring summer so it's approved in september-ish of 2026 and during that fall month well fall months

[3:45:12] Voice 17: of september and october staff in the ltc can have that early early engagement with first nations

[3:45:19] Voice 17: again just letting them know that this ocp targeted review most likely will happen and what

[3:45:27] Voice 17: level of engagement they'd like to be

[3:45:29] Trustee Evans: included in okay yeah i think um definitely pulling the

[3:45:32] Trustee Evans: business case together for the following budget is important because we know we're going to be

[3:45:39] Trustee Evans: be doing it yes so that definitely has to happen um i don't think we'll have time to get that

[3:45:47] Trustee Evans: business case done this year or this september so we should um put this as um our major project

[3:45:57] Trustee Evans: and then start the business case and we can like you said follow galliano's lead with regards to

[3:46:04] Trustee Evans: to level of engagement and topics of interest.

[3:46:08] Trustee Evans: And then when the TPS is formalized,

[3:46:13] Trustee Evans: then we'll be able to look at it,

[3:46:15] Trustee Evans: or whoever is here will be able to look at it

[3:46:19] Trustee Evans: and we'll have that engagement process started

[3:46:23] Trustee Evans: and we'll be able to start seeing with the OCP

[3:46:26] Trustee Evans: what needs to change.

[3:46:30] Trustee Evans: And also as part of the early initiation,

[3:46:34] Trustee Evans: of the project working on the opening statement

[3:46:41] Trustee Evans: from the Masonic elders as well.

[3:46:46] Trustee Evans: So that would fall into this OCP major project.

[3:46:51] Trustee Evans: So

[3:46:51] Voice 17: the LTC would be initiating that business case next year.

[3:46:56] Voice 17: Right.

[3:46:56] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:46:58] Voice 18: And sorry, just as you're following on that line of thinking,

[3:47:03] Voice 18: and thank you, this is a really good approach.

[3:47:05] Voice 18: which I feel I actually think it would be a better tactic to ask what

[3:47:12] Voice 18: they're interested in, you know, their interest in, in amending the OCP.

[3:47:18] Voice 18: It's not necessarily expecting that an acknowledgement or a renaming or

[3:47:23] Voice 18: relanguaging is the topic. It's,

[3:47:26] Voice 18: it's really opening the conversation as to so that we're actually doing it

[3:47:31] Voice 18: together there's a dialogue about how the ocp might be amended to better respect recognize and

[3:47:39] Voice 18: affirm first nations rights and place in a relationship here and

[3:47:45] Trustee Evans: i believe that's what

[3:47:47] Trustee Evans: anna stockdale was was um discussing when she was talking about uh when with this part of the

[3:47:53] Trustee Evans: engagement uh requesting what level of engagement to to is of interest and the topics that are of

[3:48:00] Trustee Evans: interest so that we have all of that information up yeah i think

[3:48:04] Voice 10: that's great important i'm just

[3:48:06] Voice 10: aware that we're almost an hour over on this we have to

[3:48:09] Voice 10: we have

[3:48:10] Trustee Evans: to wrap this up okay so um can i

[3:48:13] Trustee Evans: make a quick motion to so we can get this yeah

[3:48:17] Voice 18: let's start the

[3:48:18] Voice 19: planners

[3:48:19] Voice 18: have to leave at 2 30

[3:48:20] Voice 18: so essentially we're going to be not live streaming um after that point

[3:48:26] Trustee Evans: i've got part of the wording here um so i move that south canada local island trust committee

[3:48:33] Trustee Evans: request staff to move um

[3:48:40] Voice 17: uh stdr policies and regulation review item number seven

[3:48:48] Trustee Evans: from the

[3:48:49] Trustee Evans: the Future Projects Report to the Active Projects Report,

[3:48:57] Trustee Evans: and report back with further information

[3:49:02] Trustee Evans: and a draft project charter.

[3:49:05] Trustee Evans: Great.

[3:49:06] Trustee Evans: So yeah, staff, Lisa Millard has her hand up.

[3:49:13] Voice 16: I was just going to say that I had the motion from previous,

[3:49:16] Voice 16: but you've just restated it.

[3:49:18] Voice 16: So that's good, thank you.

[3:49:19] Trustee Evans: Oh, no worries.

[3:49:24] Voice 15: I'll second that.

[3:49:25] Voice 15: thank

[3:49:29] Voice 14: you

[3:49:40] Voice 18: moved and seconded i'll call for the vote all those in favor

[3:49:43] Voice 18: all right that

[3:49:45] Voice 18: is carried okay i'd

[3:49:47] Trustee Evans: like to make a second motion go ahead i move that south panda

[3:49:52] Trustee Evans: local island trust committee requests staff to report back with further information

[3:50:00] Trustee Evans: and a draft project charter for a major project on the OCP

[3:50:17] Trustee Evans: with regards to First Nations engagement

[3:50:23] Trustee Evans: and a business case development.

[3:50:27] Voice 17: What I could do, Trustee Evans, if you'd like,

[3:50:30] Voice 17: is I can put more information.

[3:50:32] Voice 17: When I'm reporting back in September,

[3:50:34] Voice 17: September, I can add a little bit more information, but a targeted OCP review. And at that time,

[3:50:39] Voice 17: I can provide you with language for a business case and work plan, because we just did that

[3:50:43] Voice 17: with Galliano. Perfect. So I can report back on that. Perfect. That sounds good.

[3:50:48] Trustee Evans: Okay. I just

[3:50:49] Trustee Evans: would like to get that. Yes. So I look forward to seeing that. Does that work for you? Perfect.

[3:50:57] Trustee Evans: Okay. Thank you so much.

[3:51:00] Voice 18: Okay. Can I have the wording again, just one more time?

[3:51:02] Voice 18: it's just engagement on the ocp no

[3:51:06] Voice 10: i think you're dropping the yes

[3:51:08] Trustee Evans: i'm dropping the motion as uh

[3:51:10] Trustee Evans: staff stock deal is going to come back with um the wording for that at the september meeting

[3:51:16] Trustee Evans: she's going to have all the information because she's doing a very similar project with galliano

[3:51:21] Voice 18: right now i got that she'll bring it

[3:51:22] Trustee Evans: all forward so it'll still move on thank

[3:51:26] Voice 18: you well thank you

[3:51:27] Voice 18: you so much this has been a really great uh discussion and so recognizing that the planners

[3:51:33] Voice 18: need to dash in about seven minutes um what i'd like to suggest is that if town hall becomes

[3:51:41] Voice 18: extended we're going to have to shut it down at 2 30 um trustee falk perhaps you could keep your

[3:51:48] Voice 18: um you've got a panelist link and you could be the co-host so that um lisa millard can still do

[3:51:56] Voice 18: minutes but we'll be taking the the the planners are taking the equipment with them at 2 30 so

[3:52:02] Voice 18: with that i will announce our next regular scheduled meeting is september 5th 2025

[3:52:09] Voice 18: at the south pender fire hall on pender island we'll of course have some electronic meetings

[3:52:15] Voice 18: in the meantime no kim and okay go ahead

[3:52:18] Voice 17: pender anglican hall for september 5th

[3:52:21] Voice 18: thank you north

[3:52:22] Voice 18: North Pender Anglican Hall for September 5th.

[3:52:26] Voice 18: Excellent. Thank you for that clarification.

[3:52:29] Voice 18: And so I'll open for town hall questions and comments

[3:52:33] Voice 18: and turn it over to one of you two local trustees to manage the room.

[3:52:37] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:52:39] Voice 8: Just

[3:52:39] Voice 7: a very quick clarification.

[3:52:42] Voice 7: I listened for votes and a number of votes I heard three ayes

[3:52:47] Voice 7: and a number of votes I heard two ayes.

[3:52:49] Voice 7: um were all the votes unanimous or were there some abstentions that uh did i i listened since

[3:52:59] Voice 7: we don't see people here i'm just wondering

[3:53:01] Voice 18: oh i didn't always say i but i did raise my hand i

[3:53:05] Voice 18: believe they were all unanimous thank you

[3:53:07] Voice 7: also just like to thank uh planner stockdale for

[3:53:11] Voice 7: bringing up the issue of um understanding of the new bylaw and the enforcement of the bylaw i think

[3:53:20] Voice 7: that's really important for the members to be aware of so thank you thank you one

[3:53:26] Voice 21: quick question

[3:53:28] Voice 21: when you talked about the um agricultural and the size of the building and the number of people

[3:53:35] Voice 21: 960 square feet and 10 people doesn't add up for

[3:53:42] Trustee Evans: accommodation so that is what's currently in the

[3:53:45] Trustee Evans: um in the bylaw but

[3:53:49] Voice 21: i understood that that's what you were really

[3:53:50] Voice 21: we're

[3:53:52] Trustee Evans: leaving it in there and

[3:53:53] Voice 21: that's interesting 960 square feet accommodating 10 people

[3:53:59] Voice 21: is 96 square feet per person sleeping accommodation doesn't work just just think

[3:54:07] Voice 21: about it that's all i'm asked

[3:54:08] Voice 19: thanks

[3:54:16] Voice 10: so

[3:54:17] Voice 17: we do have a in-camera meeting now it can be done quickly though

[3:54:25] Voice 18: right thank you for that reminder okay so i'll call for a um no we can't adjourn this one

[3:54:31] Trustee Evans: members of the public members

[3:54:33] Voice 6: of the public here with their purses

[3:54:35] Voice 6: Not yet. We've got it in camera now.

[3:54:37] Trustee Evans: We've got it in camera.

[3:54:40] Voice 16: Can you read the motion to go in camera at this time?

[3:54:43] Voice 18: Yeah.

[3:54:43] Voice 18: So I move that the meeting be closed to the public in accordance with the Community Charter Part 4, Division 3, Section 91A,

[3:54:52] Voice 18: personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or is being considered for a position as an officer,

[3:54:58] Voice 18: employee, or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality,

[3:55:02] Voice 18: and that the recorder and staff attend the meeting.

[3:55:05] Voice 18: there's still a member of public seconded by trustee evans it's okay we're not closed yet

[3:55:12] Voice 18: okay all all those in favor where trustee

[3:55:15] Trustee Evans: falcus trustee falcus in

[3:55:17] Voice 18: here but the two of us can vote

[3:55:19] Voice 18: all those in favor aye that is carried so if we can close the meeting and stop live streaming

[3:55:29] Voice 18: i think i think we should adjourn this section of the meeting can we do that

[3:55:35] Voice 18: um

[3:55:37] Trustee Evans: no you adjourn after we come out of um because

[3:55:41] Voice 18: this is part of the

[3:55:42] Trustee Evans: we're

[3:55:43] Voice 18: just not going to be able to do that live streaming um lisa you can adjourn

[3:55:52] Voice 16: the uh regular

[3:55:53] Voice 16: meeting at the end of the closed meeting and indicate that you're going to rise and report

[3:55:57] Voice 16: at the next meeting okay thanks for that so we'll stop the recording

[3:56:05] Voice 16: Recording.

South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 1 of 12 
 
South Pender Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Regular Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
May 2, 2025 
South Pender Fire Hall 
8961 Gowlland Point Road, South Pender Island, BC 
 
Members Present: Tobi Elliott, Chair (electronic) 
 Dag Falck, Local Trustee 
 Kristina Evans, Local Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Kim Stockdill, Island Planner 
 Bruce Belcher, Planner 2 
 Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder (electronic) 
  
Others Present: There were twelve (12) members of the public present. 
  
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
Chair Elliott called the meeting to order at 10:33 a.m.  
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
Chair Elliott acknowledged that the meeting was held on the territory of the WSÁNEC Coast 
Salish First Nations. 
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
The following addition to the agenda was presented for consideration: 
17.2 Consideration of Future Project - Discussion 
By general consent the agenda was approved as amended. 
4. TRUSTEE REPORT 
Trustee Evans reported the following: 
• Construction on the dip is scheduled to conclude at the end of June 
• Attended Chief Executive Officer Performance Evaluation Committee meeting 
• Work on the draft Islands Trust Policy Statement continues and is now being done 
through Trust Programs Committee 
• Trust Programs Committee has designated Secretariat funds to the Rural Island 
Economic Partnership, Baynes Sound/Lambert Channel Ecosystem Forum, Coastal 
Douglas Fir Conservation Partnership, Ált’ka7sem Howe Sound Community Forum, and 
the Southern Gulf Islands Forum 
Trustee Falck did not provide a report. 
ADOPTED 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 2 of 12 
5. CHAIR'S REPORT 
Chair Elliott reported the following: 
• Attended the Rural Island Economic Partnership Forum 
• Attended the Association of Vancouver Island Coastal Communities convention and 
highlighted the discussion on the impacts of the trade war and the joint presentation on 
the results of the tiny homes on wheels enablement project in the Trust area 
• Attended joint Executive Committee and Bowen Island Municipal Council protocol 
meeting 
6. ELECTORAL AREA DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None 
7. TOWN HALL AND QUESTIONS 
Trustee Evans stated she would recuse herself from any questions or discussion related to 
Temporary Use Permit application PL-TUP-2025-0142. 
By general consent Trustee Falck chaired the Town Hall portion of the meeting. 
• A member of the public asked that the 90-day limit on the use of a recreational vehicle 
be clarified and requested confirmation the matter is not related to proposed Bylaw No. 
129 
o Island Planner Stockdill indicated the amendments to Bylaw No. 129 are 
technical in nature and the intent and use regarding this matter is not changing 
 
• A member of the public stated Bylaw No. 122 was strong and workable; It protected  
homeowners, minimized environmental impact, and included options for variances 
• On the other hand, proposed Bylaw No. 129 would increase environmental impact 
and reduce privacy and rural qualities due to changes in floor level allowances and 
siting 
• They requested that Bylaw No. 122 be maintained 
 
• A member of the public spoke to the bylaw which had previously been amended to 
require a Temporary Use Permit for short-term vacation rental operations with the 
understanding the Local Government Act provided protection for pre-existing 
operations 
• However, an unanticipated change to the Local Government Act has removed this 
provision and the Local Trust Committee created a standing resolution to ensure no 
action would be taken against operators in the interim 
• They requested the Local Trust Committee review the bylaw for the next project 
 
• A member of the public noted significant time and effort has been put toward the 
proposed changes to the Land Use Bylaw and recognizes compromises have been 
made 
•  concerns of those impacted by changes to Bylaw No. 122 seemed to have been 
addressed; however, there is still fear amongst those that built under the previous 
guidelines that their homes will become nonconforming and they hope the 
forthcoming amendments to proposed Bylaw No. 129 will address the concerns 
 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 3 of 12 
• A member of the public noted most of the islands within the Islands Trust area have 10’  
interior setbacks, as it has always been; therefore, privacy is not being lost 
• Privacy concerns can be addressed with landscaping or fences 
 
• A member of the public stated the reduced side lot setback and increased house size 
allowance erode the Official Community Plan goals of maintaining the community’s 
rural character and protecting the natural environment 
• The existing bylaw protects privacy, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and 
ensures growth is gradual and sustainable 
• They noted that staff have indicated the existing bylaw does not create any legal, 
non-conforming situations with regard to dwelling maximum floor area or setbacks 
• Trustees have not provided rationale for increasing house sizes and changing 
setback allowances 
 
• A member of the public indicated they were unhappy with Bylaw No. 122, and preferred 
Bylaw No. 114, but are satisfied with proposed Bylaw No. 129 which has addressed the 
issues created by Bylaw No. 122 
 
• A member of the public noted their family has been on the island since 1953 and the 
lots were large and houses small 
• The houses were farther apart and they never felt intruded upon by a neighbour’s 
structure until large homes started being built 
• They requested the a 20’ side lot setback be maintained 
 
• A member of the public asked about the expense amount of $1409 allocated to Advisory 
Planning Commission (APC) meetings 
• They expressed support for Bylaw No. 129 on the assumption that there is an 
exception clause to protect existing dwellings from being deemed nonconforming 
o The Planner clarified the (APC) expenses are for contract minute taker fees 
o The Planner also noted that there had been a nonconformity issue in relation to 
dwelling height when Bylaw No. 122 was adopted, but not in relation to floor 
area 
 
• A member of the public stated Bylaw No. 114 was drafted according to the Official 
Community Plan that currently exists, and statements that the new bylaws are not in 
compliance with the Official Community Plan do not recognize that it has been in 
existence for many years 
• They indicated the controversary regarding side setbacks was primarily related to lot 
sizes in a subdivision that allowed long, narrow lots, and residents in those areas 
can seek considerations for their specific circumstances 
 
• A member of the public stated several people had asked them how to interpret the three 
provisions for house size and floor allowances in the proposed bylaw and they have 
been unable to provide answers because the language is confusing 
• Examples would provide clarity 
The meeting recessed for a break at 11:15 a.m. and reconvened at 11:24 a.m. 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 4 of 12 
 
By general consent Chair Elliott resumed chairing the meeting. 
8. COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING - None 
9. PUBLIC HEARING - None 
10. MINUTES 
10.1 Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes Dated March 27, 2025 (for 
Adoption) 
By general consent the South Pender Local Trust Committee meeting minutes of 
March 27, 2025 were adopted. 
10.2 Section 26 Resolutions-without-meeting - None 
10.3 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes - None 
11. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES 
11.1 Follow-up Action List Dated April 2025 
The Planner provided an update to the Follow-Up Action list. 
12. DELEGATIONS - None 
13. CORRESPONDENCE 
Correspondence received concerning current applications or projects is posted on the LTC 
webpage 
14. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS 
14.1 PL-DVP-2025-0120 (Hoyt) – Staff Report 
Planner Belcher summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• The requested variance would reduce the setback to the natural boundary of the 
sea for the siting of an existing dwelling and new patio and to the front lot line for 
the siting of an existing garage 
• The variance would bring the existing nonconforming portion of the dwelling into 
compliance prior to commencing demolition, renovation, and construction of 
an addition 
• The new patio has been sited to connect to the existing house without extending 
further into the setback to the natural boundary than the existing deck 
• There are no proposed changes to the garage structure 
• The existing structures were built in the early 1970’s and potentially before siting 
regulations came into effect 
• No formal letters were received from neighbours in response to the application 
 
The applicant was in attendance and spoke to the application. 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted: 
• A portion of the proposed patio protrudes into the setback 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 5 of 12 
• The house is being renovated in place and is not being moved further into the 
setback 
• The previous deck was removed and the proposed patio made of paving stone 
on grade would have a smaller footprint within the setback compared to the 
deck 
 
SP-2025-008 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of PL-
DVP-2025-0120. 
CARRIED 
Trustee Evans declared conflict of interest and recused herself as Trustee and joined the audience 
as an applicant. 
Chair Elliott stated Kristina Evans is the applicant and will be permitted to speak to the application 
as would any applicant, and will leave the room when discussion is undertaken. 
14.2 PL-TUP-2025-0142 (Evans) – Staff Report 
Planner Belcher summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• The application seeks a Temporary Use Permit for a short-term vacation rental 
within an existing dwelling 
• The applicant’s rationale is to allow the short-term rental of the house while the 
property is listed for sale 
• The proposed capacity is a maximum of two adults and two vehicles 
• The use of the dwelling for short-term purposes is less than one year; therefore, 
does not provide a length of time suitable to a long-term rental 
 
The applicant spoke to the application and the following comments were noted: 
• The long-term tenants will vacate the property at the end of June 
• Having a long-term tenant in place can pose barriers to the sale of the home 
• Hardship will occur without the ability to have a short-term rental to cover 
expenses during the months the property is on the market 
• The applicant requested the Trustees add the condition that the permit is 
specifically for the purpose of the sale of the house to ensure the purchaser 
does not acquire the Temporary Use Permit 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were recorded: 
• Some of the correspondence on this application expressed concern that 
granting the Temporary Use Permit would result in multiple applications being 
put forward 
• The application is for a specific period of time and not related to a business 
• Each Temporary Use Permit application is considered on its own merits 
• It was requested that the applicant provide guests with information on First 
Nation territorial rights and relationship to the land 
 
Trustee Evans left the room at 11:54 a.m.  
 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 6 of 12 
Discussion ensued regarding the applicant’s request to add a condition to the 
Temporary Use Permit that would stipulate that the short-term vacation rental use 
may only be in operation while the subject property is for sale.  
 
SP-2025-009 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend Temporary Use 
Permit PL-TUP-2025- 0142 by the addition of the following condition(s): 
1. That the short-term vacation rental use may only be in operation 
while the subject property is for sale; and 
2. To require an acknowledgement of First Nations territory, rights and 
relationship to guest information. 
CARRIED 
 
SP-2025-010 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of 
Temporary Use Permit PL-TUP-2025-0142 as amended. 
CARRIED 
 
Trustee Evans returned to the meeting at 12:07 p.m. 
The meeting was recessed for a break at 12:08 p.m. and reconvened at 12:20 p.m. 
15. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS 
15.1 Land Use Bylaw Amendment Project - Staff Report 
Island Planner Stockdill summarized the staff reported and highlighted the 
following: 
• The draft bylaw included in the staff report incorporates all amendments 
provided by the Local Trust Committee to date, and provides opportunity for 
further amendments 
• During a Special Meeting held in March, 2025 the Local Trust Committee noted 
areas that might require further information including agricultural tourism and 
maximum floor area regulations 
• Draft Bylaw No. 129 removes the conditions for use for agritourism and 
agritourist accommodation currently in Bylaw No. 122 
• The Agricultural Land Commission defines agritourism as a farm use and 
provides specific activities that can be considered agritourism and agritourist 
accommodation must be accessory to agritourism use 
• If conditions of use are included in the Land Use Bylaw there may be need to 
amend them to match those of the Agricultural Land Commission in the future 
• Currently the Agricultural Land Commission states agritourist accommodation 
can be provided on a seasonal and short-term basis but does not define those 
terms, and also regulates sleeping units to a maximum of 10 but does not 
regulate the number of guests 
 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 7 of 12 
Discussion ensued about agritourism and agritourist accommodation and the 
following comments and clarifications were noted: 
• Bylaw No. 114 regulations state agritourism and agritourist accommodation are 
only permitted on a lot located within the Agricultural Land Reserve and that 
should be maintained 
• There might be circumstances that someone with property outside of the 
Agricultural Land Reserve wants to start an agritourism business 
• The only zone that currently allows agritourism are properties within the 
agriculture zone 
• Currently the Agricultural Land Commission states that the total developed area 
for structures, landscapes, and access for the agritourist accommodation is to 
be less than 5% of the parcel size which could result in a large accommodation 
structure 
• There is support to retain bylaw language that states: 
• An agritourist accommodation structure be restricted to a maximum floor 
area of 969 square feet 
• Agritourist accommodation is not used for more than 180 days per year 
• An agritourist accommodation building may include meeting rooms and 
dining facilities contained within the unit, but may not contain a restaurant 
or retail area 
• Limit the number of guests to a maximum of 10 with 5 bedrooms 
• At the next scheduled meeting Island Planner Stockdill will provide a map and 
table showing agricultural zone properties and Agricultural Land Reserve 
boundaries for reference 
 
SP-2025-011 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend draft Bylaw No. 129 
by amending Section 2.22 to retain subsection 5.5 .19 through 22 in Land 
Use Bylaw No. 114. 
CARRIED 
 
A Trustee referenced Section 3.11.1(a) in the current Land Use Bylaw and noted the 
need to retain information on motor vehicle and license plates, and requested that 
the reference to current license year decal be removed, as the decal is no longer 
required or supplied. Island Planner Stockdill will consult with bylaw enforcement 
and report back with wording regarding this section. 
 
Discussion ensued regarding maximum floor area allowances and the following 
comments were recorded: 
• The current wording in the draft bylaw states that the total floor area of all 
buildings may not exceed the area in Column A, and the floor area of the 
dwelling may not exceed the area in Column B, despite 5.1.5(b) for a lot that 
contained a legal dwelling constructed prior to September 15, 2022 that 
exceeded the floor area in Column C 
• This language resulted in confusion and concern about a dwelling becoming 
non-conforming 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 8 of 12 
• The proposed replacement language would state the maximum floor area of all 
buildings may not exceed the area in Column A or Column B for a lot that has no 
dwelling with a floor area less than Column B and the maximum area of a new 
replacement, or altered dwelling, may not exceed the floor area in Column B 
• The wording removes the despite clause and provides two scenarios including 
dwellings built prior to, or after, September 15, 2022 
• Removing the despite clause makes it clearer under what circumstances a 
dwelling could be rebuilt and to what specific size 
• There remains the issue that if despite clauses are removed then many houses 
will be legal nonconforming and in order to address this, and the concerns 
raised by the community, additional clarifying language is required and re-
structuring the table to provide contained options would be helpful 
 
SP-2025-012 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee amend draft Bylaw No. 129 
by: 
a. Amending Section 2.14, which would amend the Rural Residential 
zone maximum floor area provisions, and replacing the current 
maximum floor area provisions with new maximum floor area 
provisions as presented in the staff report on page 5 of the meeting 
of May 2, 2025.  
b. Amending Section 2.21, which would amend the agriculture zone 
maximum floor area provisions, and replacing the current maximum 
floor area provisions with new maximum floor area provisions as 
presented in the staff report on page 5 of the meeting of May 2, 2025. 
c. Inserting new sections that would amend the Forestry and Natural 
Resource zones with the same changes to Maximum Floor Area as 
made to the Rural Residential and Agriculture zones, 
and that the bylaw be re-numbered accordingly. 
CARRIED 
 
SP-2025-013 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 129, cited as 
“South Pender Island Land Use Bylaw No. 114, 2016, Amendment No. 1, 
2025” be read a first time as amended. 
CARRIED 
 
It was clarified that first reading allows the bylaw be sent for referral but still allows 
amendments to be made prior to second reading. 
 
  

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 9 of 12 
SP-2025-014 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee has reviewed the Islands 
Trust Policy Statement Directives Only Checklist and determined that Bylaw 
No. 129, cited as “South Pender Island Land Use Bylaw No. 114, 2016, 
Amendment No. 1, 2025”, is not contrary to or at variance with the Islands 
Trust Policy Statement. 
CARRIED 
 
SP-2025-015 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee request staff to schedule a 
Public Hearing and Community Information Meeting for Bylaw No. 129, cited 
as “South Pender Island Land Use Bylaw No. 114, 2016, Amendment No. 1, 
2025”. 
CARRIED 
 
The Trustees indicated preference that the September 5, 2025 business meeting be 
held at the Anglican Church Hall to ensure adequate space for the Community 
Information Meeting and Public Hearing. 
 
 
SP-2025-016 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee request staff to schedule 
an electronic Special Meeting for the Minor Land Use Bylaw Amendment 
Project to review bylaw amendments from the May 2, 2025 meeting and to 
hold a Community Information Meeting. 
CARRIED 
16. REPORTS 
16.1 Work Program Reports 
16.1.1 Active Projects Report Dated April 2025 
   Received for information. 
16.1.2 Future Projects Report Dated April 2025 
   Received for information. 
16.2 Applications Report Dated April 2025 
Received for information. 
16.3 Trustee and Local Expense Report Dated Feb 2025 
Received for information. 
16.4 Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions 
Received for information. 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 10 of 12 
16.5 Local Trust Committee Webpage 
No updates required at this time. 
16.6 Reconciliation and First Nation Relationship Building 
16.6.1 Monica and Paul Petrie re Correspondence 
Monica Petrie read a report regarding reconciliation and relationship 
building and highlighted the following: 
• On April 29 the W̱SÁNEĆ Elders Council/ SELW̱ÁN were on S,DÁYES/ 
Pender Island to witness the Installation of the W̱SÁNEĆ Territorial map 
at the Pender School 
• Chief Pelkey presented the map to Pender School Principal Margo 
Landahl in a traditional W̱SÁNEĆ cultural ceremony witnessed by the 
following five Elders: WEC’KINEM-Eric Pelkey J,SIṈTEN - John Elliott 
SELILIYE - Belinda Claxton ȻOSINIYE - Linda Elliott XEṮXÁṮTEN - Earl 
Claxton Jr 
• The leadership of School District 64 and the full student body 
participated in the full day cultural event  and learned the importance of 
the “witnessing ceremony” for maintaining and protecting oral history 
and sharing Traditional Knowledge 
• The map installation event included engagement with the grade 7 class 
from the Pender School and the grade 7 SENĆOŦEN immersion class 
from the W̱SÁNEĆ Tribal School and was coordinated by the ṮEṮÁĆES 
Reconcili-Action team in partnership with the Pender School, the 
W̱SÁNEĆ Tribal School, the W̱SÁNEĆ Leadership Council and supported 
by a grant from the Real Estate Foundation of BC 
• the SELW̱ÁN met with the ṮEṮÁĆES Reconcili-Action team to provide 
guidance for the next two installations on S,DÁYES 
16.7 Islands Trust Conservancy Report Dated Feb 2025 
  The report was received for information and Chair Elliott provided a verbal update. 
17. NEW BUSINESS 
17.1 2024/25 Annual Report - Request for Decision 
SP-2025-017 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Island Local Trust Committee approves the attached text 
for inclusion in the 2024/25 Annual Report for approval by Trust Council and 
submission to the Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs. 
CARRIED 
17.2 Consideration of Future Project – Discussion 
Discussion ensued about potential projects and the following comments were 
noted: 
• Review of short-term vacation rental policies and regulations is an option for the 
Local Trust Committee’s next minor project 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 11 of 12 
• A major project could include Official Community Plan amendments; however, 
any major project would flow in to the next term and with changes being made to 
the Islands Trust Policy Statement the timing is better suited to starting an 
Official Community Plan Review project in the next term 
• Consideration of starting an Official Community Plan major project this term to 
enable pre-engagement with First Nations would require a request for project 
approval be made within a few months 
 
SP-2025-018 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that South Pender Local Trust Committee request staff to move review of 
short-term vacation rental policies and regulations from the Future Projects 
Report to the Active Projects List and report back with options for short-term 
vacation rental policies and regulations as a minor project and draft a 
project charter. 
CARRIED 
 
Island Planner Stockdill indicated she will provide information for a Targeted Official 
Community Plan Review project and business case in 2026. 
18. UPCOMING MEETINGS 
18.1 Next Regular Meeting Scheduled for September 5, 2025 at the South Pender Fire 
Hall, Pender Island 
19. TOWN HALL  
A member of the public asked if all votes conducted by the Local Trust Committee during 
the meeting were unanimous or if there any abstentions and Chair Elliott clarified all votes 
were unanimous. 
A member of the public stated that a maximum floor allowance of 960 square feet for an 
agri-tourism accommodation structure permitting 10 guests does not seem large enough.  
20. CLOSED MEETING (Distributed Under Separate Cover) 
20.1 Motion to Close the Meeting 
SP-2025-019 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
that the meeting be closed to the public in accordance with the Community 
Charter, Part 4, Division 3, s. 90(1)(a): 
(a) personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or 
is being considered for a position as an officer, employee or agent of 
the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality; 
AND that the recorder and staff attend the meeting. 
CARRIED 
The regular meeting was closed to the public at 2:28 p.m. and was adjourned at the conclusion of 
the in-camera meeting at 2:31 p.m. 
20.2 Recall to Order 

 
South Pender Local Trust Committee 
Regular Business Meeting 
May 2, 2025 ADOPTED Page 12 of 12 
20.3 Rise and Report 
Chair Elliott will rise and report at the next scheduled Local Trust Committee regular 
meeting. 
21. ADJOURNMENT 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 2:31 p.m. 
 
 
 
_________________________ 
Tobi Elliott, Chair 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder