Gambier Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, June 24, 2025

[0:00:05] Voice 12: Chair Patrick you're ready to go.

[0:00:07] Voice 5: Thank you so much trustee.

[0:00:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm ready. Well good morning everyone. I would like to call this meeting a regular meeting of the Gambier-Keats Local Trusts Committee to order.

[0:00:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): We are live streaming and recording. The recording will be available on our website in the coming days.

[0:00:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm thrilled to acknowledge that we are meeting today the unceded territories of the Squamish First Nation.

[0:00:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm more thrilled to have come here today, this morning, via the storm away, coming up onto the island.

[0:00:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): And it's so wonderful to be here on this beautiful day.

[0:00:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): And this is an incredible island that you have.

[0:00:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): have. And I'm so honored to be here amongst you today. Would like to make some introductions. So

[0:01:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm Laura Patrick. I'm elected on Salt Spring and I'm the chair of this local trust committee. And

[0:01:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm joined today by Trustee Kate Louise Stanford and Trustee Joe Bernardo. And together we make

[0:01:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): up your local trust committee. We have a number of staff with us today in the room. We have Sonia

[0:01:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): Zupanets, and we have Marlis McArter. They're both island planners. In the background, which you'll

[0:01:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): hear me speaking with Lisa Millard, she is taking our minutes, and Rene Jamaret, our regional

[0:01:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): planning manager, is standing by, and in the background, and so is Warren Digman, the manager

[0:01:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): of bylaw enforcement. So this meeting is an official forum for your local trust committee

[0:01:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): committee to make decisions about land use planning matters and to discuss relevant business.

[0:01:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): This is also a place of employment. Our staff have the right to a safe and respectful workplace.

[0:01:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): And there will be time in the meeting for you to speak in a few moments, but first I have an agenda

[0:02:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): before us and want to see are there any changes, additions to the agenda today. Trustee Stanford.

[0:02:07] Voice 11: Thank you, Chair. Just because we have people here that probably don't want to spend all day

[0:02:13] Voice 11: out of the little sun that we've been getting um i'd like to switch um delegations has been

[0:02:20] Voice 11: canceled so if we could move the new business items 12.1 12.2 up to number eight where

[0:02:30] Voice 11: delegations

[0:02:30] Voice 21: will be half a bit please okay um

[0:02:33] Voice 11: then we can work through that i think it's a better

[0:02:39] Voice 11: fit for

[0:02:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): work that we're doing later yeah what she's asked is that we're going to move item 12.1

[0:02:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): and 12.2 up to item eight because the uh the presentation from the sunshine coast regional

[0:02:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): district on the flood mapping isn't going to happen today it's been postponed it'll come to

[0:02:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): us probably in the september meeting are there any other changes to the agenda nothing

[0:02:59] Voice 4: for me thanks

[0:03:00] Voice 4: uh

[0:03:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): can we then approve the agenda as amended through general consent yes thank

[0:03:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): you so much

[0:03:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): much

[0:03:06] Voice 4: so

[0:03:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm going to move into the report section of the uh of the agenda which is item 4.1 trustee

[0:03:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): reports who'd like to go first I

[0:03:17] Voice 4: can be brief about this um I've had two things to report kind

[0:03:22] Voice 4: of generic I guess in both cases but not specifically highly relevant to the Gambier

[0:03:29] Voice 4: local trust here but to the larger trust business just last week we had one of our quarterly

[0:03:35] Voice 4: meetings of trust council which is the body of all the trustees that come together to discuss

[0:03:39] Voice 4: area-wide issues in the past those meetings have um they've uh had the disability of having very

[0:03:48] Voice 4: long agendas in to be dealt with in a relatively limited amount of time and a certain amount of

[0:03:55] Voice 4: inefficiency and the effect and the effectiveness of the of the meetings and i'm happy to report

[0:03:59] Voice 4: that um the encouraging news at this last meeting it was quite efficient quite productive there's

[0:04:05] Voice 4: has been trust chair Patrick, credit goes to her,

[0:04:10] Voice 4: as well as the executive committee and the staff

[0:04:12] Voice 4: that have worked together to approve that meeting process.

[0:04:15] Voice 4: And I thank them for that,

[0:04:16] Voice 4: because that's meant to people

[0:04:17] Voice 4: and kind of been an irritation for me since I was elected.

[0:04:20] Voice 4: But the meeting was run very efficiently

[0:04:24] Voice 4: and we're making progress in improving our processes.

[0:04:27] Voice 4: The other item is kind of on a more personal note,

[0:04:30] Voice 4: September last year, but it's sort of business related.

[0:04:34] Voice 4: September of last year, Trust Council voted to send a letter to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

[0:04:39] Voice 4: asking that the province undertake a comprehensive review of the Islands Trust Act.

[0:04:43] Voice 4: I won't go into the details of the why's and wherefore's.

[0:04:46] Voice 4: It's all in the public record.

[0:04:50] Voice 4: The minister in late April finally responded to say, you know, it's really to boil it down.

[0:04:55] Voice 4: It wasn't a priority compared to many of the other things he's got on his plate.

[0:05:00] Voice 4: In May, a group of former trustees wrote a public letter to the minister

[0:05:03] Voice 4: commending a monolith decision, and there were things in there

[0:05:07] Voice 4: that claimed that no review is necessary because, in their view,

[0:05:11] Voice 4: the mandate makes environmental protection a top priority,

[0:05:16] Voice 4: and it suggested that the current trustees want to change that.

[0:05:20] Voice 4: That didn't sit well with me and some others, and about 10 days ago,

[0:05:24] Voice 4: together with another current trustee and some former trustees,

[0:05:28] Voice 4: I signed a public letter to the minister.

[0:05:30] Voice 4: to dispute with the former trustees said there's no need to get into details that here but

[0:05:36] Voice 4: it's enough to say that um there's a dispute over what the um there's a dispute in the public

[0:05:44] Voice 4: basically about what the mandate actually means and it's enough to say that this trust council

[0:05:49] Voice 4: understanding of the mandate is based on legal advice that the mandate includes preservation

[0:05:54] Voice 4: protection of human interests as well as environmental interests with balancing approach

[0:05:59] Voice 4: approach is required and for some arguing for balance is controversial and I expect the public

[0:06:07] Voice 4: debate will continue but the reason I signed the letter was to get the message to the minister that

[0:06:13] Voice 4: there was more than one view about this and that it really would be helpful if the minister would

[0:06:18] Voice 4: speak to Chair Patrick and the executive committee to get a better understanding of how the trust

[0:06:22] Voice 4: works so that's what I've been up to thank you thank

[0:06:25] Voice 11: you Trustee Stanford I'm also going to talk

[0:06:28] Voice 11: a little bit longer than i usually do with my reports um i'm gonna start with my trustee report

[0:06:36] Voice 11: um i'm there's really only one thing i'd like to talk about as a trustee and that's the activities

[0:06:44] Voice 11: over the past month in the southwest peninsula um i cannot overstate the negative impact

[0:06:52] Voice 11: that the letter that some of us received has had on the community i've spent hours listening to

[0:06:58] Voice 11: neighbors who are afraid they're being watched, that they're being targeted specifically, or that

[0:07:03] Voice 11: there is some... Oh, I'm going to start. I'm going to start with an introduction. The past month has

[0:07:12] Voice 11: been quite challenging on the Southwest Peninsula. An anonymous group of neighbors sent a letter

[0:07:17] Voice 11: to some local residents outlining their intention to actively seek items, trust, and SCRD bylaw

[0:07:24] Voice 11: compliance on properties across the island and outlined specific properties and situations that

[0:07:30] Voice 11: they would focus on initially. The same day the letter was delivered, the regional district bylaw

[0:07:35] Voice 11: officers visited the island to inspect several properties that were of note in the letter.

[0:07:40] Voice 11: I cannot overstate the negative impact this notice has had on the community. I've spent hours

[0:07:45] Voice 11: listening to neighbors who are afraid they're being watched, they're being targeted specifically,

[0:07:50] Voice 11: or that there's some small infraction that could be discovered.

[0:07:53] Voice 11: The overall intent of the complaint system of bylaw enforcement in rural BC,

[0:07:59] Voice 11: outside of health, safety, and environmental issues,

[0:08:02] Voice 11: is to provide recourse for worst-case scenarios so landowners can live peaceably

[0:08:07] Voice 11: and have the regulatory backup if they are directly impacted by their neighbor's behavior.

[0:08:14] Voice 11: To use bylaw complaints as an anonymous threat

[0:08:17] Voice 11: or to teach the consequences of not obeying quote unquote is not in the spirit of living

[0:08:23] Voice 11: in a rural community to put it mildly and that is just my opinion although both the letter drop

[0:08:31] Voice 11: and the SCRD bylaw visit occurred on the same day and seemed to be related the details were

[0:08:37] Voice 11: far more complex and had been surfacing for some months both at the Islands Trust and the

[0:08:43] Voice 11: the regional district, as applications and subsequent permitting was not jiving for some

[0:08:48] Voice 11: properties. As the political representative for both the Islands Trust and the regional district,

[0:08:54] Voice 11: it has been an intricate process to work through, but it is now clear that each situation is unique

[0:09:01] Voice 11: and both the Islands Trust and the regional district are working out these discrepancies

[0:09:06] Voice 11: with the impacted landholders that that is the current status I hope Islanders can get

[0:09:14] Voice 11: more answers today as we work through our staff reports and consider for the future what options

[0:09:21] Voice 11: there are to ensure our bylaws are clear and provide flexibility in today's development

[0:09:26] Voice 11: environment as well as look at tools to head off further vexatious complaints just I want to make

[0:09:34] Voice 11: sure we can work together to get beyond what essentially was a poison pen letter and get on

[0:09:41] Voice 11: with being the strong island community that excels in supporting and celebrating each other.

[0:09:46] Voice 11: So that's all I want to say about the trust as a trustee and there will be options for people

[0:09:53] Voice 11: to speak. I'm just providing some background for which you're going to speak to I'm sure at a later

[0:10:00] Voice 11: time. Thank you.

[0:10:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, thank you. Well, from my report, you may hear that the trust policy

[0:10:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): statement is a document that I'm not well named. What is the trust policy statement? It's a general

[0:10:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): set of policies that play out from the federation level, what the preserve and detect mandate means.

[0:10:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): The current version is very old. It was from the early 1990s. And since early 2019, we've been

[0:10:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): working on updating that document and we're getting very close in the next week here or so

[0:10:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): an assembled draft of that trust policy statement will be in a agenda package going to a committee

[0:10:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): of the whole meeting of trust council i really encourage you to read the document

[0:10:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): please take a look at it i think it's a it's it's actually well done

[0:10:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): and there's a lot of commitments to getting our processes straightened out so that we don't wait

[0:11:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): another 30 years before we update the document that we have a good process in place because

[0:11:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): this document should be maintained in an updated standpoint so I really encourage you to read it

[0:11:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): take a look at it we're moving toward first reading with with trust counsel that and once

[0:11:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Once a first reading is given, there's going to be approximately six-month engagement process

[0:11:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): where it'll be coming back to you formally for your opportunities to provide input on

[0:11:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): that document.

[0:11:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I just want you to have that heads up that it is coming.

[0:11:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): Please, please, please read it and look forward to receiving your comments.

[0:11:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): And now we're back over to you on your electoral area director's report.

[0:11:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): So

[0:11:52] Voice 11: for the regional district, there's so much going on, but the vast majority of the stuff doesn't interest Islanders.

[0:12:00] Voice 11: So I'm going to stick to the items that I think will be of the most interest.

[0:12:07] Voice 11: I'm OCP'd out. We've got OCPs here. I've got official community plans being harmonized on the mainland.

[0:12:17] Voice 11: There's seven OCPs on the Sunshine Coast, they're going to try and bring them all together under one document.

[0:12:27] Voice 11: And that's just like with here, it's to make planning management more clear and more streamlined.

[0:12:33] Voice 11: So that's going to be a project over the next 18 months on the mainland.

[0:12:37] Voice 11: We have our own process that we'll talk about later. It's not impacted by what happens on the mainland side.

[0:12:45] Voice 11: Oh, one of the things I did a couple of weekends ago, I met with a 22 person, the Combined Forces Unit with the Canadian Forces Regional Liaison Program for emergency response.

[0:13:04] Voice 11: It's the coordination of military support for local emergencies.

[0:13:07] Voice 11: And they outlined several, they outlined their national structure, how they respond to emergencies.

[0:13:14] Voice 11: emergencies and how they work with regional districts and with the Provincial Emergency

[0:13:20] Voice 11: Coordination Centre, the Coast Guard, BC Wildfire and RCMP. Depending on the situation, the liaison

[0:13:27] Voice 11: unit can mobilize up to 350 reserve personnel for fire, flood or earthquake scenarios in BC.

[0:13:35] Voice 11: It's designed to be self-sustaining and it comes with its own accommodation and food services.

[0:13:40] Voice 11: I asked, obviously, about evacuation scenarios for water access communities, and there were a variety of plans that they have that resource Coast Guard assets, naval vessels, and BC ferries.

[0:13:57] Voice 11: The joint unit also organizes for supply drops if a situation would call for it.

[0:14:03] Voice 11: Our own coordinator, Nancy Hughes, added that there's local coordination for remote communities that include water taxing companies, private vessels, and docking unloading spots that have been set up ahead of time as far up as the pulp mill.

[0:14:21] Voice 11: There's now new funding in place to present a regional emergency evacuation plan that does include island evacuations.

[0:14:29] Voice 11: So we're just in the hiring process for that project.

[0:14:31] Voice 11: So we should be getting more details about how that works, specifically for islands.

[0:14:39] Voice 11: Another thing on the emergency note is Mary Beth Lafferty and I, we participated in the West House Sound Community Association's Neighborhood Emergency Planning Workshop,

[0:14:49] Voice 11: develops neighborhood pod systems, so people get together to combine their resources as a neighborhood, three to 25 homes.

[0:14:59] Voice 11: it's simple effective and it's a first line of emergency preparedness focused on surviving for

[0:15:05] Voice 11: a minimum of 10 days in remote areas in case of a catastrophic event like an earthquake it also

[0:15:12] Voice 11: provides actions to support for evacuation for neighborhoods and their pets and this is a lot

[0:15:19] Voice 11: to do with how do you support your neighbor if they're not in the house which for us happens

[0:15:27] Voice 11: happens quite a bit, and what kinds of priorities do they have that we can support them, including

[0:15:33] Voice 11: animals. It would be great to have a similar workshop on the island at some point, and I'm

[0:15:39] Voice 11: hoping that we can organize that. Finally, there's the New Brighton Dock. There is a tentative

[0:15:48] Voice 11: delegation set aside for the SCRD consultant who's been doing a feasibility study for the

[0:15:56] Voice 11: the New Brighton Dock to present initial findings on July 24th at the Committee of the Whole.

[0:16:03] Voice 11: I will make sure that agenda package is made available as soon as I hear it's published.

[0:16:10] Voice 11: I'm not expecting clear answers, but there will be some more documentation and actions forward

[0:16:19] Voice 11: as we try and maneuver through this extremely complicated dock ownership scenario.

[0:16:28] Voice 11: So that's where I'd like to leave it. Thank you for your patience on my extra long

[0:16:33] Voice 11: diatribes today. Thank you. Good information.

[0:16:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, now it's your turn to have an opportunity

[0:16:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): to speak. Do you want to hear your questions and comments at this time? Later in the agenda,

[0:16:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): we'll be making some and discussing some various topics and making decisions and your questions

[0:16:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): and comments are valued and help us make good decisions. If you are the applicant, we have one

[0:16:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): an application today, you will have an opportunity to discuss with us directly at the time later in

[0:17:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): the agenda. But if you are here and you're not the applicant and you have comments about the

[0:17:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): application, this would be the right time to speak. When addressing the local trust committee,

[0:17:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): really address that you speak to us, the three of us, not to the audience, not directly to staff,

[0:17:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): just direct to us up here. Speak to issues, never individuals, and I ask that you be clear, concise,

[0:17:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): and respectful. We do have a full agenda today, but I'm not going to run a clock.

[0:17:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): There's no timer running here, but I do ask that you be respectful of the time, and if you are

[0:17:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): repeating yourself, I might ask you to wrap up. Please, please allow me that, but we're here to

[0:17:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): listen to you and that's important now since we are live streaming the microphone is here it is

[0:17:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): pretty good but generally if you've got a loud voice you can talk to us from your chair if you're

[0:18:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): quiet I would ask that you maybe just come stand over to the side so that the microphone could pick

[0:18:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): you up so with that who would like to speak to us today go ahead

[0:18:14] Voice 20: hi good morning and if you could

[0:18:17] Voice 20: state your name that would be helpful sure my name is Sophia I'm from Gambier Island I've been here

[0:18:22] Voice 20: for a few years um and just speaking um in response of Kate Louise's report what's happened

[0:18:30] Voice 20: in the last month and receiving a letter from an anonymous group who's sort of self-appointed

[0:18:36] Voice 20: themselves um about governing and monitoring um how people are living here um and it's been

[0:18:45] Voice 20: very, very concerning. It's deeply impacted the entire island, not just Southwest Peninsula.

[0:18:53] Voice 20: There has been a voice in the last four weeks for people to express themselves in response to this

[0:19:01] Voice 20: letter, and it's been very overwhelming for myself. I was one of the properties that was

[0:19:07] Voice 20: targeted and so basically there is investigations going in with SCRD's enforcement policy with the

[0:19:17] Voice 20: bylaws because there's been a severe lack of communication from what has been identified

[0:19:23] Voice 20: as far as in relation to the complainants going in to the SCRD bylaws the five targeted properties

[0:19:36] Voice 20: that are pointed out in this letter have a connection to someone behind the property

[0:19:45] Voice 20: ownership or work that's done on these particular properties. So it is looked at as a retaliatory

[0:19:53] Voice 20: bad faith of complaints. It is seen as an abusive process according to the SRD bylaw policy

[0:20:01] Voice 20: see further bylaw enforcement so again that's being looked into further but what overall

[0:20:08] Voice 20: concerning this has provided to islanders this this group is how our our properties are built

[0:20:16] Voice 20: looking at the land use bylaw and looking at the definition of a dwelling

[0:20:21] Voice 20: dwelling. I live in a dwelling by definition of Island Trust land use bylaws. Now having

[0:20:29] Voice 20: to go through basically on this blanket of complaints that have come into the five properties

[0:20:34] Voice 20: and one of the five has lived in their property since 2012 is that now we have to abide by

[0:20:42] Voice 20: a step three code of energy efficiency and other types of BC building code. When you

[0:20:49] Voice 20: You have a BC building code that's changed as of March of 2024, almost 1,200 pages thick.

[0:20:57] Voice 20: You know, coming to such a rural island with no infrastructure, we need affordable housing and sustainable housing over here.

[0:21:07] Voice 20: We cannot continue to live in a situation that people are living in the city, for instance, where their building inspectors are done regularly.

[0:21:15] Voice 20: And looking at Hornby and Denman Island bylaws, they basically have their siting and land use regulations that the owner takes it upon themselves and has the responsibility to build their dwelling or their home to basically standard and not having to have a bylaw officer come in.

[0:21:41] Voice 20: And that's what I understood from looking at the Hornby and Denman Island siting and land use rules, is that it would be ideal if Gambier Island has an opportunity for residents to see if they're willing to also get into that category.

[0:22:00] Voice 20: And hopefully with the planners discussion, we can maybe work on that and see if residents would be open to having that.

[0:22:09] Voice 20: because otherwise it's destroying peace um and i've heard from islanders that have lived here

[0:22:17] Voice 20: for 50 years plus and they're just beside themselves thinking boy i live off grid um

[0:22:23] Voice 20: am i gonna get you know ratted on the way i live and that and that i'm not built to code um and

[0:22:30] Voice 20: it's just sort of destroyed the entire island's uh feelings of of how people live that they're

[0:22:36] Voice 20: are being watched. People are needing to get security cameras now. It's not a nice feeling.

[0:22:42] Voice 20: I've only been here a few years. And so I just want to, you know, put that out there that there

[0:22:48] Voice 20: is further digression looking at the SCRD law enforcement policy, because according to what

[0:22:54] Voice 20: the policy says, they should not have enforced such complaints, a blanket of complaints and

[0:23:02] Voice 20: And using a local resident's vehicle to also go around the island for those five properties is very questionable as well.

[0:23:11] Voice 20: So thank you for letting me speak.

[0:23:14] Voice 20: And hopefully we can come to some resolution working with the planners around how we live and understanding what is a dwelling.

[0:23:22] Voice 20: Because, and I'll finalize this, is that I did have an engineer construct the foundation.

[0:23:28] Voice 20: I am living in something that is sound and safe to live in, but now having to pour out

[0:23:33] Voice 20: thousands of dollars to abide by step code three and you name it out there because of

[0:23:39] Voice 20: this one complaint on the five properties is totally unjust.

[0:23:46] Voice 7: Well, thank you for addressing this today.

[0:23:49] Voice 7: Who

[0:23:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): else would like to go to

[0:23:51] Voice 7: the back row, please?

[0:23:51] Voice 6: I just have a simple question.

[0:23:53] Voice 6: Are the bylaws regarding living in accessory buildings different on Hornby, Denman, and

[0:24:01] Voice 6: Mesquitee than

[0:24:02] Voice 5: they are on Gannon?

[0:24:08] Voice 5: I don't know if we can answer that.

[0:24:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you, Mike.

[0:24:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): I don't know if we're prepared to answer that question today, so living in accessory

[0:24:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): buildings?

[0:24:21] Voice 6: Well, the whole thing is based on,

[0:24:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): it

[0:24:24] Voice 6: starts with definitions.

[0:24:26] Voice 6: yes what is a dwelling and Sophia spoke to that and I think the test that she does

[0:24:33] Voice 6: in what I would consider as well however you guys have a say about that

[0:24:39] Voice 14: and

[0:24:40] Voice 6: so we have heard

[0:24:41] Voice 6: that on Hornby, Denman and Mesquite the code load or the the bylaw the amount of pressure that

[0:24:51] Voice 6: you know that the load of wildlife is less and it's extremely complicated i've spoken to kate

[0:25:00] Voice 6: about this and you guys are it it's tough stuff but so that my question is simple

[0:25:09] Voice 6: is there a i would call it an inconsistency between how the loads affect those three islands

[0:25:17] Voice 6: and how they affect Gambier.

[0:25:21] Voice 6: So it's a simple question.

[0:25:23] Voice 6: And do you guys have any idea?

[0:25:25] Planner (probable): I can maybe provide a bit of clarity.

[0:25:27] Planner (probable): So I'm hearing a bit of confusion.

[0:25:30] Planner (probable): So Islands Trust, we deal with land use.

[0:25:34] Planner (probable): So we have our land use bylaw that has regulations around siting and setbacks

[0:25:39] Planner (probable): and what you can do on the property.

[0:25:42] Planner (probable): Then there's the BC Building Code, which is separate from Islands Trust.

[0:25:45] Planner (probable): And on Gambier Island, the BC building code is enforced by building inspection through the SCRD.

[0:25:52] Planner (probable): Right.

[0:25:53] Planner (probable): So that is separate from Islands Trust.

[0:25:56] Planner (probable): So when SCRD gets a building permit, we will receive a referral from the SCRD.

[0:26:04] Planner (probable): And in that, we would look and see, is the land use permitted?

[0:26:10] Planner (probable): Is this building sited correctly?

[0:26:12] Planner (probable): Would it look like lot coverage?

[0:26:13] Planner (probable): There would be different things.

[0:26:16] Voice 6: So all of those metrics, are they applied equally to Hornby, Denman, and Liskety as they are applied to Amherst?

[0:26:24] Planner (probable): Yeah, so the same thing. They have a land use bylaw on Denman and Hornby and Liskety.

[0:26:30] Planner (probable): They don't have building inspection. So the regional district, the Comox Valley Regional District, for example, does not have enforcement power.

[0:26:40] Planner (probable): There's no building inspector. So that would be done by the province.

[0:26:43] Planner (probable): They're still required to build to the BC building code.

[0:26:46] Planner (probable): A neighbor could still choose to complain if a building was not being built to code.

[0:26:51] Planner (probable): They wouldn't complain to Islands Trust.

[0:26:52] Planner (probable): They would complain to whatever branch, you know, whether it's technical safety or whatever branch.

[0:26:57] Planner (probable): When

[0:26:58] Voice 6: you speak about, is it by-law Island, Gander Island by-law number 86, is that the one you're talking about here?

[0:27:05] Voice 6: That's, yeah, the land use law.

[0:27:06] Voice 6: The definition of a dwelling is in there.

[0:27:09] Planner (probable): Yes.

[0:27:10] Voice 6: and that same definition applies to these other items they might

[0:27:14] Planner (probable): have a different definition i

[0:27:15] Planner (probable): would have to review their bylaws but it's the same like generally but

[0:27:20] Voice 6: i think i understand that

[0:27:21] Voice 6: because i think the thing is that okay i

[0:27:24] Voice 6: think i i was going to say you guys

[0:27:25] Voice 9: get into a good

[0:27:26] Voice 9: question i know where you're going um and i do you have something you'd like to add or yeah just

[0:27:32] Voice 4: with the proviso that the public comment period is for public comment we can be flexible about

[0:27:39] Voice 4: to providing the information you need, but there are boundaries here. I think it's important to

[0:27:45] Voice 4: just make the point very clear that places like Hornby and Denman, Liskety, Gambier, we each have

[0:27:54] Voice 4: our own land use bylaws. So the building siting setback, all that stuff is going to vary. So

[0:28:04] Voice 4: So that's under our rules because we actually have, for example,

[0:28:09] Voice 4: Gangra has its own land use bylaw sheet,

[0:28:12] Voice 4: which is also part of the Gangra local coast area has its land use bylaw

[0:28:17] Voice 4: and they aren't uniform.

[0:28:19] Voice 4: And the definitions often are slightly different.

[0:28:23] Voice 4: With respect to that other issue,

[0:28:26] Voice 4: the building code inspections and how they're administered,

[0:28:30] Voice 4: It is one code, but it's going to be administered by different bodies here at the SDRD, elsewhere, and there's naturally going to be differences in how those things are administered.

[0:28:43] Voice 4: Right.

[0:28:45] Voice 11: And just really briefly, often we're talking about the definition of a dwelling can be any kind of definition.

[0:28:51] Voice 11: But when it comes to the occupancy permit, that is where things become clear.

[0:29:01] Voice 11: because that is the the criteria for that is by the province and if you want to live in a tiny

[0:29:09] Voice 11: little house or a great big house it still has to fit all the criteria under occupancy permit

[0:29:15] Voice 11: so that is consistent on all dwellings so we can change our definitions of dwellings

[0:29:21] Voice 11: but at the end of the day the provincially um the provincial authority behind occupancy permit

[0:29:29] Voice 11: is where some of these issues are coming to him.

[0:29:33] Voice 11: All right.

[0:29:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[0:29:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): So would you like to speak next?

[0:29:39] Voice 17: My name is Vader.

[0:29:41] Voice 17: And I think there is a little confusion

[0:29:43] Voice 17: in understanding the land use and the vehicles.

[0:29:47] Voice 17: And I think this has got to do more with the land use.

[0:29:51] Voice 17: As you know, a lot of people are short-term renting their properties

[0:29:57] Voice 17: and they are doing it in a system.

[0:30:00] Voice 17: buildings, which is in conflict with the land use. So they just

[0:30:06] Voice 17: want to clarify that. And unfortunately, Island Trust

[0:30:10] Voice 17: never did provide proper information, public information

[0:30:15] Voice 17: to public to know that there is no short term. And what short

[0:30:19] Voice 17: term means is 31 days. So people are confused. And since

[0:30:24] Voice 17: especially the COVID, there's a hell of a lot of short term

[0:30:31] Voice 17: and so on and that's what you pointed out it's the land use which is in question it's not the code

[0:30:39] Voice 17: these are

[0:30:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): multiple issues um so i've recorded that yeah yeah i think clarification always helps

[0:30:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right is there anyone else go ahead yeah

[0:30:53] Voice 13: i'd like to just address why i

[0:30:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): think your name again

[0:30:55] Voice 13: My

[0:30:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): name

[0:30:57] Voice 13: is Mark. Why the SRD building code bylaw on size should not apply on Gambier Island.

[0:31:05] Voice 13: Number one, there are unique circumstances here. Remote islands often have distinct topography,

[0:31:09] Voice 13: infrastructure and community needs. One size fits all bylaw from a regional district fails

[0:31:14] Voice 13: to account for these distinctive factors. There are also environmental and access issues.

[0:31:19] Voice 13: Consider whether the bylaw serves a legitimate environmental or safety purpose, especially in

[0:31:25] Voice 13: a sensitive or hard to service location where frequent power outages and the need for wood-based

[0:31:30] Voice 13: heating make larger building requirements an onerous and unfair burden on Gambier Island

[0:31:35] Voice 13: residents. Additionally bringing building materials and qualified trades people is considerably more

[0:31:40] Voice 13: expensive and in some cases prohibitive and destructive to rural infrastructure specifically

[0:31:46] Voice 13: road degradation, dust, air pollution and habitat disruption. There's also enforcement irregularities

[0:31:53] Voice 13: in the bylaw. The recent enforcement constitutes unreasonableness and bad faith. The bylaw is

[0:31:58] Voice 13: arbitrary, discriminatory, and not connected to a legitimate planning purpose. Comparative data

[0:32:06] Voice 13: shows inconsistent application or targeting of specific individuals. We have records and

[0:32:13] Voice 13: statements indicating that the bylaw enforcement acted for improper motives. The solution.

[0:32:19] Voice 13: The examples of Leskeetee and Main Island include Leskeetee Island Building Regulation

[0:32:25] Voice 13: Approach.

[0:32:26] Voice 13: There are no building inspection or permits.

[0:32:29] Voice 13: Leskeetee Island is unique among the islands, trust, for it has no building inspections

[0:32:33] Voice 13: or building permit requirements for most construction projects.

[0:32:37] Voice 13: The Land Use By-law No. 78 regulates use, density, siting, but does not enforce the

[0:32:43] Voice 13: BC Building Code or require building permits for dwellings or outbuildings.

[0:32:47] Voice 13: They have a community-driven best practice where they've developed voluntary best practices for building, emphasizing sustainability and self-reliance.

[0:32:59] Voice 13: Their justification comes from community values being autonomy, off-grid living, and a low-impact lifestyle.

[0:33:07] Voice 13: style. There's a strong tradition of owner-built homes and alternative building methods on Laskiti

[0:33:14] Voice 13: with a lack of formal inspection as seen as supporting affordability and innovation

[0:33:20] Voice 13: while voluntary guidelines encourage safety and sustainability.

[0:33:24] Voice 13: Main Island has relaxed setbacks and building code restriction size restrictions.

[0:33:29] Voice 13: Main Island's local trust committee has granted development variance permits to relax setbacks

[0:33:36] Voice 13: requirements from the sea for decks and cottages and has responded to recent

[0:33:41] Voice 13: relaxations in the building BC building code regarding minimum dwelling sizes the

[0:33:46] Voice 13: rationale for this is to accommodate existing non-conforming structures allow

[0:33:51] Voice 13: for small scale affordable housing and recognize the unique lot shapes and

[0:33:55] Voice 13: waterfront conditions of the island so what I'm asking for is that the islands

[0:34:01] Voice 13: Islands Trust resolved to relax the building code size restrictions, draft a resolution

[0:34:07] Voice 13: that exempts from building code size restrictions for Gambier Island, whereas the Gambier Island

[0:34:13] Voice 13: Local Trust Committee recognizes the need for flexible housing options, including the

[0:34:18] Voice 13: construction of small dwellings and cottages to support affordable, sustainable, sustained

[0:34:23] Voice 13: seasonal living. I'm asking that the dwelling or cottage is the only principal residence

[0:34:32] Voice 13: residents required on the parcel with structure if the structure otherwise complies with applicable

[0:34:39] Voice 13: siting use and density regulations of the land use bylaw and that all health and safety

[0:34:44] Voice 13: environmental requirements are met could

[0:34:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): you submit or email us what you just asked your

[0:34:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): question i think that would be sure

[0:34:55] Voice 13: and um yeah i'll leave this behind that

[0:35:00] Voice 7: would be wonderful

[0:35:01] Voice 7: Yes, thank you.

[0:35:03] Voice 13: Again,

[0:35:04] Voice 4: as wide awards are going to just bounce in and comment on that, but it might be helpful for you, Mark, which is it's not within our jurisdiction.

[0:35:17] Voice 4: Change or mitigate building code requirements. That's something that I think we have to appeal to the CRD for that.

[0:35:25] Voice 4: Our jurisdiction is at the land planning level, as Plan for Cargory pointed out before.

[0:35:32] Voice 4: Siting issues, development permit area requirements, setbacks.

[0:35:40] Voice 4: We create the framework for the siting, basically, and certain requirements that construction has to meet.

[0:35:48] Voice 4: but the actual code requirements we don't have any control over that's provincially mandated

[0:35:53] Voice 4: and administered by the strd so if you're looking for leeway uh in that respect i think you have to

[0:35:59] Voice 4: go to this strd for that our role in that respect uh

[0:36:05] Voice 5: if

[0:36:06] Voice 4: the strd chooses to consult with us we might

[0:36:08] Voice 4: have before you know we might have an opinion about it about whether it's helpful or not

[0:36:11] Voice 4: but we don't have the power to to make those changes i'm

[0:36:16] Voice 13: not sure that's true

[0:36:16] Voice 11: okay just a

[0:36:17] Voice 11: second the trustee stanford again there's there's so many layers that you're speaking to so first of

[0:36:24] Voice 11: all you're talking to the islands trust yeah

[0:36:27] Voice 14: this

[0:36:28] Voice 11: is the gam your local trust committee is its own

[0:36:30] Voice 11: independent body so it has different um it has its own ability to provide regulations so it doesn't

[0:36:40] Voice 11: have to be uniform across the whole of the islands trust it's just what each individual island area

[0:36:45] Voice 11: it is so when um for instance maine does relaxation of setbacks so do we if we don't have size

[0:36:55] Voice 11: requirements that's not part of the issue it's it's how the building is built to provincial code

[0:37:02] Voice 11: which that is the part we don't have control over so you can build a wonderful tiny like we've got

[0:37:10] Voice 11: 300 square foot buildings that they're just tiny little cottages they fit the building code they

[0:37:18] Voice 11: get the occupancy permit and that's the difference that it's being able to build to the provincial

[0:37:26] Voice 11: occupancy permit that seems to be where the challenge is and that's the one part we do not

[0:37:31] Voice 11: not have any say in how that occupancy permit is delivered or so

[0:37:38] Voice 13: is the occupancy delivered

[0:37:40] Voice 13: equally across all dwellings if

[0:37:43] Voice 11: they're new dwellings they have to meet certain requirements

[0:37:47] Voice 11: if they're old dwellings that's something we can and i i'd like to talk further about and we can

[0:37:53] Voice 11: do that later on in the great about

[0:37:55] Voice 11: how we can make this work a little bit better there's options

[0:38:01] Voice 11: there are and just but it's clarifying what all the terms mean because i'm hearing all sorts of

[0:38:07] Voice 11: different terms that don't actually relate to what the problem is right there all the sort of things

[0:38:12] Voice 11: you talked about we can do here we we can and you'll see an example of it later on where we've

[0:38:19] Voice 11: got an old building it's not in the right place and we're going to work through it and make as

[0:38:25] Voice 11: because we have that power to relax those regulations still

[0:38:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): submit your question i'm

[0:38:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): going to come back to you after we get other people that have first time to speak if that's

[0:38:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): okay so you in the background

[0:38:36] Voice 7: irina i'm sorry yeah i just had some information from the building

[0:38:43] Voice 7: and it says that local jurisdiction can amend the poll as necessary

[0:38:52] Voice 7: said so i don't agree with the gentleman over there who says that you guys don't have any power

[0:39:01] Voice 7: in changing the rules which

[0:39:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): local uh i don't know i know warren is uh i don't know warren if you've

[0:39:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): got the ability to clarify that so this

[0:39:17] Voice 1: is a chair with with the local government act with

[0:39:19] Voice 1: with the Islands Trust Act, Islands Trust does not have any jurisdiction over building codes

[0:39:23] Voice 1: or building code enforcement, building inspection. It is strictly limited to land use. So while you

[0:39:32] Voice 1: will find it references on the internet to what local government can do, and while the Gambier

[0:39:38] Voice 1: Local Trust Committee is a local government, its powers are limited to land use and only land use.

[0:39:44] Voice 1: and it can't affect any changes

[0:39:46] Voice 1: about building code, building code regulations

[0:39:49] Voice 1: unless the province were to amend

[0:39:51] Voice 1: the Islands Trust Act

[0:39:52] Voice 1: to give us that authority.

[0:39:57] Voice 21: Right. Thank you.

[0:39:59] Voice 4: Again, a point of clarification

[0:40:01] Voice 4: to help the public understand this.

[0:40:05] Voice 4: To the extent that the building code,

[0:40:07] Voice 4: there's room for flexibility

[0:40:08] Voice 4: and relaxation of requirements.

[0:40:13] Voice 4: It's not any local government

[0:40:15] Voice 4: it's the relevant local government, which in this case, for Danforth, would be the Sunjankos Regional District.

[0:40:22] Voice 4: They have the power to do what you were talking about before.

[0:40:32] Voice 4: Well, we've been an electoral area director here.

[0:40:36] Voice 4: year i'm

[0:40:38] Voice 11: one of the suggestions that i'm hoping that uh residents who are impacted by this take

[0:40:44] Voice 11: up is to do a delegation to the regional district and say this is what's happened here this is you

[0:40:51] Voice 11: know how can we work through this to come to some kind of resolution and clarify what kinds of

[0:40:59] Voice 11: codes fit where um and our part is how do we manage a system to look at

[0:41:12] Voice 11: sighting and use size items that do relate to what happens here density things like that so it's

[0:41:22] Voice 11: there's two different levels but anything to do with the building code i do suggest

[0:41:27] Voice 11: you speak to the SRD and do a delegation

[0:41:32] Voice 11: and work through that system.

[0:41:36] Voice 11: And I think Trustee Stanford can help you

[0:41:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): set that

[0:41:39] Voice 11: delegation up for

[0:41:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): success because I agree that would be very good

[0:41:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): to help educate the overall board.

[0:41:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's very complicated.

[0:41:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): Are there others that would like to speak to us today?

[0:41:56] Voice 16: me all right i'm paul boswich from centre bay i've been a resident here full-time for

[0:42:04] Voice 16: over 40 years i want to start by apologizing to you all because when i came to the march 24th

[0:42:13] Voice 16: meeting i was loaded for bear thinking that this problem that we had was a governance problem on

[0:42:19] Voice 16: the island. And since that time, and a ton of, you talk about being OCD'd out,

[0:42:28] Voice 14: the same has been

[0:42:35] Voice 16: going on for me, but I've been trying with my reduced cognition to understand this problem

[0:42:41] Voice 16: better. So I'd like to take a much different tonal approach now. What we've seen today,

[0:42:51] Voice 16: this morning is clear to those of us not from this part of the island. The southwest peninsula

[0:42:56] Voice 16: of Gambier has issues that are very different than we have on the rest of the island. What's

[0:43:04] Voice 16: also become clear since that last meeting, and I was shocked to hear that you guys can't talk to

[0:43:10] Voice 16: each other except for in a meeting. I look at the size of this bureaucracy even here today,

[0:43:17] Voice 16: and you added people in Victoria.

[0:43:21] Voice 16: This is a challenging mess.

[0:43:24] Voice 16: We've become very familiar with the requests made

[0:43:27] Voice 16: by the trust to municipal affairs

[0:43:32] Voice 16: around defining your mandate.

[0:43:36] Voice 16: We also understand the review that was done recently

[0:43:41] Voice 16: was very damning.

[0:43:42] Voice 16: And so this is a process from our standpoint

[0:43:45] Voice 16: point in the unorganized part of the aisle that is seemingly moving very fast, although you guys

[0:43:55] Voice 16: think you've been at this forever. You can recognize from the turnout that we had at the 24th meeting

[0:44:01] Voice 16: that this is of concern to us. How we're governed here is of concern to us. So the first approach

[0:44:13] Voice 16: was well let's get at you and stop you from doing what you're doing but what we recognize

[0:44:19] Voice 16: is you're constrained in such an interesting way to have two-hour meetings occasionally

[0:44:26] Voice 16: through the year to plan our island for 25 years seems absurd so we've asked ourselves

[0:44:34] Voice 16: what can we do to cooperate with you and allow me to refer to my notes for a second

[0:44:50] Voice 16: not only is gambier divided by the southwest peninsula and the rest but what we've also

[0:44:56] Voice 16: recognized we don't know each other in the disconnected part of the island and over the

[0:45:03] Voice 16: last months we've started to connect with the brigade bay the douglas bays and all that we all

[0:45:13] Voice 16: all have different gambiers we live on 150 acres that we virtually seldom ever come on

[0:45:21] Voice 16: other people live in small houses up in brigade bay and one thing another and their issues are

[0:45:26] Voice 16: much different um the initial i even i think you've even recognized that the initial questionnaire

[0:45:38] Voice 16: that came out around this was not all that robust the um the return on that questionnaire was very

[0:45:46] Voice 16: very low. We would like this process to slow down. And we would like to, we recognize you

[0:45:59] Voice 16: have a number of other constraints, one being budget. And you've spent most of it talking

[0:46:07] Voice 16: to the First Nations, a situation that is being informed by the Sechelt and Pender Harbor

[0:46:17] Voice 16: harbor dock and other situations today in the comments it was very heartening to hear

[0:46:28] Voice 16: about the comments about the spirit of living in a rural area to hear that each situation is unique

[0:46:38] Voice 16: this is what we're arguing around waterfront development you can't make a blanket

[0:46:42] Voice 16: blanket decision on all the properties unfortunately our waterfront is not regular i needn't tell you

[0:46:49] Voice 16: guys this you talked about flexibility you talked about working together and you've recognized that

[0:46:59] Voice 16: the seasonal majority seasonal population on this island does not want to come to inconveniently

[0:47:07] Voice 16: timed meetings on a tuesday in the middle of when the meeting is going to be all day

[0:47:12] Voice 16: and you can comment in the morning or late in the afternoon.

[0:47:17] Voice 16: So on this one, we suggest everybody just watch this.

[0:47:24] Voice 16: You talked about Keats being different.

[0:47:27] Voice 16: We'd like to recognize the unique difference of this island.

[0:47:33] Voice 16: A huge proportion is Crown Land.

[0:47:40] Voice 16: This is completely unique in all the other Islands Trust Islands.

[0:47:46] Voice 16: And the last comment made by Kate Louise was, how can we do this to make this work here?

[0:47:56] Voice 16: And our suggestion is simple. We'd like you to delay your process for a year.

[0:48:07] Voice 16: We would like to fund an appropriate process, not to advocate from our positions,

[0:48:15] Voice 16: but to assist you to truly get community involvement at a level that could be unique

[0:48:24] Voice 16: to our island that we could take the challenges that confront you and the challenge that we've

[0:48:33] Voice 16: had of not being able to communicate with each other never feeling a need until the last moment

[0:48:39] Voice 16: until you know we're in second readings and this type of thing and so we are asking you to consider

[0:48:46] Voice 16: that. I don't think that's something that you're going to naturally jumble. We started

[0:48:57] Voice 16: on Thursday, we put out a notice. They're up on the public docs here, and we're inviting

[0:49:03] Voice 16: a comment by people to see if there is as much concern as some of us are exercising

[0:49:12] Voice 16: about your initiatives. And to date, and I'll provide you a letter that we're asking you to

[0:49:19] Voice 16: consider, and we can give you the name since Friday night, since we had a little challenge

[0:49:24] Voice 16: with the website. We've already got a couple of dozen names and people simply asking,

[0:49:32] Voice 16: let's slow this down. Allow us to do this right. Please. Is there some, do we have a

[0:49:40] Voice 16: formalized proposal for you? No, we don't. But wow, you guys, we'd like this done better too.

[0:49:51] Voice 16: we're not asking you for any money we'll we'll fund this ourselves all we need is time

[0:49:58] Voice 16: but you guys are pushing this too fast for us and we're scared those of us who've been here

[0:50:07] Voice 16: for a long time with our own properties don't have i i feel you um we don't have um we don't

[0:50:17] Voice 16: have the same problems new people will have in development but i think overloading this process

[0:50:22] Voice 16: with the consultants in one thing or another

[0:50:25] Voice 16: before somebody comes and says,

[0:50:27] Voice 16: look, I want to put a dock in like this.

[0:50:29] Voice 16: So I'll stop now.

[0:50:31] Voice 16: I'm going to hand you two things, if I may.

[0:50:37] Voice 16: This is the local, I don't know,

[0:50:41] Voice 16: I'll give that to you.

[0:50:43] Voice 5: It's two-sided.

[0:50:44] Voice 16: You may have seen that.

[0:50:46] Voice 16: And this letter, can I read?

[0:50:54] Voice 16: Not that.

[0:50:56] Voice 16: All right, quickly.

[0:50:57] Voice 16: We are calling for delay on the current official community plan and land use bylaw review process

[0:51:03] Voice 16: to ensure Gambier residents have the time and opportunity to properly review what is being proposed.

[0:51:10] Voice 16: The process to date has lacked sufficient public outreach and meaningful engagement.

[0:51:15] Voice 16: Consultation with residents has been limited, leaving many without clear opportunity to participate,

[0:51:22] Voice 16: ask questions, or understand the implications of these proposed changes.

[0:51:26] Voice 16: This is especially troubling as these decisions will directly impact our homes, access, and long-term character of our community.

[0:51:36] Voice 16: We are further concerned that the upcoming community information now is being held during working hours on a weekday,

[0:51:44] Voice 16: making it difficult and impossible for many residents to attend, especially with no participatory virtual meeting often being offered.

[0:51:52] Voice 16: offered. To ensure a fair and inclusive process, we asked for the following. A pause or extension

[0:52:01] Voice 16: of the current review timeline, clear and accessible materials that show what is being

[0:52:06] Voice 16: proposed and why. And the reason we went to the work that we've done on this website is simply

[0:52:12] Voice 16: to provide a package of your materials that's approachable. It took me nine hours to go through

[0:52:23] Voice 16: through the information on the Islands

[0:52:25] Voice 16: Trust website

[0:52:27] Voice 16: around docs and all this other stuff.

[0:52:29] Voice 16: We can't ask our fellow Islanders to have to do that.

[0:52:35] Voice 16: We'd like you to make available a draft

[0:52:38] Voice 16: of the present OCB work and to date

[0:52:41] Voice 16: and provide us additional opportunities

[0:52:43] Voice 16: for meaningful consultation that reflect the value

[0:52:47] Voice 16: and needs of the Island residents.

[0:52:49] Voice 16: residents. It goes on to assert our rights as citizens. You guys have a challenging job.

[0:53:02] Voice 16: We'd like to cooperate with you. We don't like what you've done to date much. We just like the

[0:53:09] Voice 16: chance to do this better. I don't think anybody here wants to do this worse. Can we find a way

[0:53:19] Voice 16: to have you consider this sincere request that we are allowed the time to organize our fellow

[0:53:28] Voice 16: islanders to see what we would like so we can tell you what we want and you can tell us what we've

[0:53:36] Voice 16: got to have. That's what we'd like. Thank you very much for allowing us the opportunity to present

[0:53:45] Voice 16: our concerns. Thank you.

[0:53:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you very much. Okay. Is there no, we don't clap. Sorry. Why

[0:53:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): do I ever want to feel free to speak? That's why we don't clap. Public

[0:53:57] Voice 5: speaking

[0:53:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): is a very

[0:53:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): difficult thing for a lot of people and we want everyone to feel comfortable. So that's, that's

[0:54:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): why. All right. Any other first-time speakers? And we do want to wrap up. We want to get

[0:54:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): working together here so uh uh go ahead

[0:54:14] Voice 3: sure thank you my name is scott um we have a place in

[0:54:18] Voice 3: long bay um two and a half acres fall a little bit a little bit smaller than your place

[0:54:23] Voice 3: but just to give you an idea of different sizes of our community and um as a family we've been

[0:54:30] Voice 3: there for five generations not that it really matters but we have been around for a while

[0:54:35] Voice 3: and um i signed that letter and sent it to your office as well and i'm in full support

[0:54:42] Voice 3: of what um paul's message was today and i look forward to a response with regards to the request

[0:54:49] Voice 3: so thank you thank

[0:54:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): you any other first-time speakers because uh i know there's some of

[0:54:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): you second-time speakers that are wanting to go but uh trustees so you don't want to

[0:55:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): do you labor this i just

[0:55:03] Voice 11: want to clarify that there will be more opportunity to talk but deeper

[0:55:08] Voice 11: into some of the issues that we've heard this morning um we are going through some reports that

[0:55:15] Voice 11: that do speak to a lot of things that you've been talking about today so hopefully you'll have time

[0:55:21] Voice 11: to stick around and this will certainly not be the only time we get a chance yeah Lawrence and

[0:55:27] Voice 16: I unfortunately have to go back to town and we can't stay this is very important to us this is

[0:55:32] Voice 16: we've had a previous commitment that we have to keep we're not

[0:55:37] Voice 16: asking for to stay with this

[0:55:41] Voice 16: process of yours we're asking you to slow it down so we can have

[0:55:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): we've heard heard your request

[0:55:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustee Bernardo I

[0:55:48] Voice 4: just want to follow up with trustee Stanford was saying which is that on the

[0:55:52] Voice 4: agenda today's agenda in fact many of the issues that you the public comment received today with

[0:56:01] Voice 4: respect to process are going to be addressed in the course of those discussions because

[0:56:08] Voice 4: the public engagement process is a topic for discussion so rest assured public engagement

[0:56:18] Voice 4: is not something we take for granted.

[0:56:20] Voice 4: We do understand that in different circumstances,

[0:56:24] Voice 4: we have to be thoughtful about it,

[0:56:26] Voice 4: that it's not just appointment.

[0:56:29] Voice 4: But I'm not going to belabor it.

[0:56:32] Voice 4: We can get into that when we get into that

[0:56:33] Voice 4: actually business item.

[0:56:34] Voice 4: Thank you.

[0:56:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): And I want you to know,

[0:56:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): this is not the only time you can communicate with us.

[0:56:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): You can pick up the phone.

[0:56:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): You can email us, communicate.

[0:56:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): Anytime you have comments and questions,

[0:56:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): you don't have to wait for a public meeting

[0:56:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): to talk to us we're all available our phone numbers are publicly available for you and you

[0:56:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): can talk to us anytime so please please realize that this is not just our only moments to talk

[0:57:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): and with that I'd like to get us back to the agenda so we can get on and so that this crowd

[0:57:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): up here can do it's talking together because you are correct this is our time to be together

[0:57:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): other so i'm going to move on and i'm going to move on to item 6.1 on the agenda which is our

[0:57:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): minutes it's on page four and um um so we have minutes from march laura did

[0:57:31] Voice 16: you miss one of the

[0:57:32] Voice 16: speakers did

[0:57:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): you not did i have to say it yeah open once and i i apologize because i thought

[0:57:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): you had spoken earlier so no i haven't

[0:57:41] Voice 21: uh you've heard this before at the march 25th meeting

[0:57:45] Voice 21: water access only residents feel left out of the process and that our needs are not understood

[0:57:53] Voice 21: at all we ask for true consultation and not just being asked to respond to policies written by the

[0:58:00] Voice 21: trust we want to have the time for a true consultative process that's open and transparent

[0:58:09] Voice 21: and we don't feel that it has been very transparent to date.

[0:58:14] Voice 21: Other water access only residents are coming together to talk and organize.

[0:58:19] Voice 21: I have taken part in four OCP processes over the last 40 years

[0:58:25] Voice 21: and I have never experienced such a limited public engagement process.

[0:58:30] Voice 21: It feels closed, uninviting, exclusive.

[0:58:34] Voice 21: And that's partly because of the geographic separation

[0:58:37] Voice 21: and when i was on the last gambier ocp process there was more than one meeting location for any

[0:58:49] Voice 21: important meetings and referendums now it's you know not everybody can get here on a weekday

[0:58:56] Voice 21: in the middle of the day it's a working day for a lot of people a lot of people don't have

[0:59:01] Voice 21: transportation I had to catch a ride over here it feels anyway it the trust has failed to engage

[0:59:10] Voice 21: and educate the water access property owners and they feel that they are complaining they feel like

[0:59:17] Voice 21: they don't matter and that they're being left out of the process and something needs to be done about

[0:59:24] Voice 21: that and we don't see that it is being done because we said in march this isn't a good time

[0:59:32] Voice 21: yet 60 people showed up probably because it was in the city it was somewhat easier to get to

[0:59:38] Voice 21: for people who aren't on holidays on gambier but this needs to be rethought because it has not been

[0:59:46] Voice 21: an inclusive process well

[0:59:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): thank you thank you very much we've heard you and we're going to

[0:59:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): to be talking about engagement in a little bit here. Okay, so I'm going to move on here to item 6.1, which is

[1:00:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): our minutes from that March 25th meeting.

[1:00:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustees, are there any additions or corrections

[1:00:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): that need to be made to those minutes?

[1:00:07] Voice 4: No comment from David.

[1:00:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): Can we approve those through general consent?

[1:00:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): Just, just, I'm sorry.

[1:00:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): That was on page four.

[1:00:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): I had some.

[1:00:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): No, it's good.

[1:00:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): So can we approve those for general consent?

[1:00:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, we have resolutions without leading report here

[1:00:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): on page 14 for information.

[1:00:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): and I'm going to move on then to our follow-up action list on page 15 of the agenda this is just

[1:00:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): items that are outstanding I'll first turn to staff are there any items in the follow-up action

[1:00:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): list that you need to bring to our attention any questions on the follow-up action list no

[1:00:54] Voice 4: We, some time ago, in fact, last year, we asked staff to initiate overture to Squamish

[1:01:06] Voice 4: Nation so that elected officials are going to be able to meet with Squamish Nation.

[1:01:11] Voice 4: I see, well, actually, there hasn't been any progress at all on that.

[1:01:16] Voice 4: It's been quite a while.

[1:01:19] Voice 4: um can you provide us with an update on that please as to uh what the intervening priorities

[1:01:26] Voice 4: are because i do think as certainly part of the ocp ocp process it um i think it'd be helpful for

[1:01:35] Voice 4: just in terms of building up the relationship with squamish nation for us to at least have

[1:01:40] Voice 4: some kind encounter with them to get to know each other so what's this what's the story behind the

[1:01:47] Voice 4: related sure

[1:01:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): um our manager regional planning manager renee chambers online as she is she's

[1:01:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): at the helm of coordinating and supporting all of the summaries with those recommendations

[1:01:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): i work solo with the staff of the rights and technical department sure and

[1:02:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): report back to

[1:02:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): you on the technical engagement that we're conducting for your ocp so we're heavily

[1:02:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): involved with squamish at the technical level and i appreciate the political level um that's

[1:02:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): not the case yet and so i understood from staff as well that they're very anxious to see the

[1:02:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): the draft ocp lub direction that you're headed in in terms of incorporating and implementing

[1:02:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): their recommendations for exclamation as well so that when you do meet with chief and council that

[1:02:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's a sense of which direction the ocp review is headed so at this point i'm not able to get

[1:02:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): their staff any sense of which of their recommendations have been identified as being

[1:02:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): implementable because they're still at the stage of your review of those so the first one was the

[1:02:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): development permit area which is on the discussion today too so if the regional planning manager is

[1:02:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): available she could probably have a better sense of what

[1:03:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): the timeline looks like and she has raised

[1:03:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): Raise your hand. So over to you, Regional Planning Manager, Gemara.

[1:03:09] Voice 2: Good afternoon, Chair. Thank you for the question.

[1:03:11] Voice 2: I don't have an update at this time for that particular item,

[1:03:16] Voice 2: but I can always follow up and share that update with the LTC.

[1:03:20] Voice 2: So my apologies.

[1:03:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you. Trustee Sanford?

[1:03:25] Voice 11: And then follow up to that, I understand that the Squamish Nation

[1:03:31] Voice 11: won't be having their elections in September,

[1:03:33] Voice 11: which means there's generally a no engagement for a few months prior to that we might have to

[1:03:42] Voice 11: be waiting till the next council i

[1:03:44] Voice 4: understand that that makes sense uh given where they're at but

[1:03:48] Voice 4: i do think that uh once the new yeah the new electives are in place that actually might be

[1:03:56] Voice 4: helpful as they get comfortable with the role and start to fill in their responsibilities that

[1:04:04] Voice 4: they get to know us and we get to know them so it's part of the process.

[1:04:08] Voice 4: I don't have any particular great points I think to be made with Swamish Nation

[1:04:15] Voice 4: contrary to some of the public comments this is actually I consider this to be actually

[1:04:20] Voice 4: we're at the preliminary stages of developing the OCP notwithstanding the project's been in

[1:04:27] Voice 4: the books for many years and i do think it's important that we understand the perspective

[1:04:35] Voice 4: of squamish nation separate from the technicalities like we the technicalities are important but we

[1:04:41] Voice 4: step aside and build a relationship where we can actually understand where the respective

[1:04:50] Voice 4: governments are coming from what we can do and what we can't do what the ultimate objectives are

[1:04:57] Voice 4: for both bodies.

[1:04:59] Voice 4: And having that type of general effort

[1:05:02] Voice 4: to understand each other,

[1:05:03] Voice 4: I think can only help us

[1:05:04] Voice 4: when we start fine tuning the technical stuff.

[1:05:06] Voice 4: So yes, by all means,

[1:05:09] Voice 4: obviously we'll have to wait until after the elections,

[1:05:11] Voice 4: but I really hope we can put some energy into making this.

[1:05:14] Voice 4: Thank you.

[1:05:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you.

[1:05:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any other comments on the file of action list?

[1:05:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): Might as well just receive that.

[1:05:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): Moving on to item 7.1 is the bylaw enforcement notice

[1:05:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): bylaw amendment staff report here on page 19 of the agenda and I see we have manager Dingman

[1:05:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): over to you good

[1:05:38] Voice 1: afternoon chair this amendment bylaw was brought previously before the local

[1:05:43] Voice 1: trust committee in March you gave it three readings and then we're ready to move forward

[1:05:49] Voice 1: for approval by executive committee uh it was realized that the bylaw was not quoted properly

[1:05:56] Voice 1: within the original staff report and so the readings were not correct so that's why we're

[1:06:04] Voice 1: asking you to once to rescind the first three readings that you gave in march and then do the

[1:06:10] Voice 1: first readings again and then pass a resolution to forward it once again to the executive committee

[1:06:16] Voice 1: committee uh because this time we believe we have it correct and shouldn't be any more snafus as we

[1:06:23] Voice 1: try to move this amendment by law forward it has been thoroughly reviewed by the ledge clerk this

[1:06:28] Voice 1: time so we believe the information is all correct now

[1:06:32] Voice 9: justin bernardo uh

[1:06:34] Voice 4: i don't uh since it's a

[1:06:36] Voice 4: carryover and really just a correction of something before that happened before i don't think we need

[1:06:41] Voice 4: to uh to debate this uh i'm prepared to uh offer the motion and spare benefit any further discomfort

[1:06:52] Voice 11: all right to read them out can we just say recent i think

[1:06:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): unfortunately we have to read them out

[1:06:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): that's standard i just

[1:06:59] Voice 11: love to move

[1:07:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): to just move as presented but we're getting there okay that's

[1:07:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): a process issue that we're moving toward so go ahead trustee bernardo all

[1:07:08] Voice 4: right uh i moved at

[1:07:10] Voice 4: the gambler island local trust committee was in the first three readings of the gambier island

[1:07:14] Voice 4: local trust committee bylaw number 160 cited as gambier island local trust committee bylaw

[1:07:21] Voice 4: enforcement notification bylaw number 116 2011 amendment number one 20.5 is

[1:07:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): there a second second

[1:07:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): by trustee stanford any discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor that carries i moved to

[1:07:38] Voice 4: the gambler island local trust committee bylaw number 160 cited as gambler island local trust

[1:07:42] Voice 4: committee bylaw notification bylaw number 116 2011 number one like 25 be read a first time

[1:07:50] Voice 4: so we're second second by trustee stanford discussion

[1:07:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): all the vote all those in favor

[1:07:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): that carries

[1:07:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): i

[1:07:59] Voice 4: move that the gambler island local trust committee bylaw number 160 center has

[1:08:02] Voice 4: gambler island local trust committee by law enforcement notification bylaw number 116

[1:08:07] Voice 4: 2016-2011 amendment number one 2025 be read a second time second by trustee stanford

[1:08:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor carry i

[1:08:20] Voice 4: include the gambler at a local trust

[1:08:22] Voice 4: committee bylaw number 160 cited as gambler at a local trust committee by law enforcement

[1:08:26] Voice 4: notification bylaw number 116 2011 amendment number one 2025 be read a third time second

[1:08:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Seconded by Trustee Stanford.

[1:08:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion, call the vote.

[1:08:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor, that's carried.

[1:08:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[1:08:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): I

[1:08:41] Voice 4: see the finish line that the Gambier Island,

[1:08:44] Voice 4: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[1:08:46] Voice 4: bylaw number 160 cited as Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[1:08:50] Voice 4: bylaw enforcement notification bylaw number 116, 2011.

[1:08:55] Voice 4: Amendment number 1, 2025 be forward

[1:08:57] Voice 4: to the Secretary of the Island's trust

[1:08:59] Voice 4: or approval of what we take.

[1:09:00] Voice 4: Thank you.

[1:09:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): Seconded by Trustee Stanford.

[1:09:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion?

[1:09:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'll call the vote.

[1:09:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor?

[1:09:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): And that carries.

[1:09:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): That was because we had an error in a reference.

[1:09:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): So lots of reading, error's been fixed.

[1:09:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): That moves on.

[1:09:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): So thank you very much.

[1:09:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you, Manager Dingman.

[1:09:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, we're gonna keep on moving.

[1:09:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): We don't have item eight,

[1:09:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): and we've moved up items 12.1 and 12.2 to replace it today.

[1:09:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): Item 12.1 is the By-law Compliance Enforcement Policy

[1:09:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): staff report it's on page 86 of your agenda package a moment to get there and I will invite

[1:09:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): again manager Dingman thank

[1:09:43] Voice 1: you chair so the staff report presents to the local trust committee

[1:09:49] Voice 1: a bylaw compliance and enforcement policy these are policies that have now been presented to

[1:09:57] Voice 1: multiple local trust committees and have been adopted by multiple local trust committees.

[1:10:04] Voice 1: So the purpose of this document would be to incorporate all current standing resolutions

[1:10:09] Voice 1: for compliance and enforcement into a single document and to provide comprehensive policies.

[1:10:15] Voice 1: One of the issues that this policy document will address is vexatious complaints for which there

[1:10:22] Voice 1: There have not been previous policies developed, so this document will enable the local trust

[1:10:30] Voice 1: committee to adopt such policies and expand them or refine the definition if it chooses.

[1:10:37] Voice 1: As it states in the report, vexatious complaints are not common, but they do occur and enforcement

[1:10:44] Voice 1: should not proceed based on retaliatory or vexatious complaints or complaints that are

[1:10:49] Voice 1: are done for an improper purpose. So you do have the option to do this. The enforcement and

[1:11:00] Voice 1: compliance policies are adopted throughout BC. These policies have been developed in accordance

[1:11:08] Voice 1: with Trust Council policies, which provide the overarching trust-wide policies regarding

[1:11:14] Voice 1: regarding different issues, especially investigations.

[1:11:18] Voice 1: This policy is really directed towards the enforcement powers,

[1:11:23] Voice 1: authority that the Local Trust Committee has.

[1:11:27] Voice 1: And so within these policies, you will see priorities that the current listed priorities

[1:11:35] Voice 1: are taken from standing resolutions that defer enforcement for specific issues.

[1:11:41] Voice 1: issues. These priorities can be deleted, expanded as the local trust committee sees fit to address

[1:11:51] Voice 1: different enforcement issues throughout the different islands within the Gambier local

[1:11:58] Voice 1: trust area. This is a policy for right now the entire local trust area that would address

[1:12:06] Voice 1: multiple land use bylaws. There are local trust committees that have adopted policies that would

[1:12:12] Voice 1: have separate sections for associated islands or islands that have their own land use bylaws such

[1:12:19] Voice 1: as keats if the local trust committee would wish wishes to do that and provide different inspection

[1:12:27] Voice 1: enforcement policies for those specific islands like keats or the associated islands i will note

[1:12:36] Voice 1: Now, within the proposed policy, if you do move forward with this today,

[1:12:43] Voice 1: in Part B, there is a reference to Bylaw No. 156-2011.

[1:12:48] Voice 1: That's an error that you would need to adopt a resolution to delete that reference.

[1:12:55] Voice 1: That's an incorrect bylaw reference.

[1:13:00] Voice 1: But other than that, and any other changes that the local trust committee

[1:13:05] Voice 1: committee would wish to address within this particular policy you can adopt the resolution

[1:13:10] Voice 1: to amend it as you see fit are there any questions from the committee

[1:13:16] Voice 17: trustee bernardo right um i

[1:13:20] Voice 4: gather from your remarks that um what we're looking at here is a combination of largely an

[1:13:29] Voice 4: introduction of some policies that the attempt is to make them area wide at the moment and so

[1:13:41] Voice 4: they're essentially documenting new policies together with consolidating

[1:13:46] Voice 4: previous resolutions standing resolutions and in that respect at section 4.0

[1:13:53] Voice 4: that is the am i right in assuming that that is the only consolidation that we're dealing

[1:13:59] Voice 4: with here in terms of pre-existing standing resolutions that

[1:14:03] Voice 1: is correct there are two

[1:14:05] Voice 1: resolutions that within the staff reported references and that you could rescind today

[1:14:08] Voice 1: if you adopt this policy and uh these are those only those two resolutions that i am aware of

[1:14:15] Voice 1: that have specific uh compliance or enforcement policies for the gambier local trust area

[1:14:20] Voice 1: well

[1:14:21] Voice 4: if you rescind them or we just leave them yeah yeah so and everything everything am i

[1:14:28] Voice 4: correct and assuming that everything other than 4.2 4.0 is is essentially new it

[1:14:35] Voice 1: would be new for

[1:14:36] Voice 1: yes it would for the gambier local trust carry it'd be new and you're correct much of this is

[1:14:40] Voice 1: standardized amongst the other uh local trust area policies um as much as possible of course

[1:14:49] Voice 1: but each local trust committee has been adopting specific issues

[1:14:56] Voice 1: or references or policies for their individual needs.

[1:15:04] Voice 4: This policy, I've got a few more questions if I may, Chair.

[1:15:09] Voice 4: The policy, this enforcement policy that's proposed for our trust area

[1:15:14] Voice 4: or local trust area.

[1:15:15] Voice 4: it um i again i have to assume that as it was developed uh but i could be wrong assuming this

[1:15:25] Voice 4: that it was developed with the view to be consistent with the draft enforcement policy

[1:15:30] Voice 4: that has been proposed but not yet passed for by trust counsel to apply to the trust area overall

[1:15:37] Voice 4: and as i understand it that larger overarching enforcement policy is currently being reviewed

[1:15:42] Voice 4: by the ombudsperson's office is that right that's correct

[1:15:46] Voice 4: so so that policy that being

[1:15:50] Voice 4: you know under review by the ombudsperson is the policy that's in front of us consistent with that

[1:15:56] Voice 4: one i

[1:15:58] Voice 1: would say it will be it won't conflict with trust council policy trust council isn't

[1:16:05] Voice 1: the enforcement authority for your local trust area this committee is so in writing up these

[1:16:11] Voice 1: policies originally it was done being aware of trust council policies and to ensure that there

[1:16:18] Voice 1: were no conflicts so everything that this adopts uh the local sorry the trust council policy already

[1:16:28] Voice 1: permits or states that the local trust committees can do the local trust committees can adopt their

[1:16:34] Voice 1: own policies is what i'll say the local trust committees can close files these type of references

[1:16:39] Voice 1: differences uh when it comes to compliance and enforcement within their local trust area

[1:16:43] Voice 1: so everything that has been reviewed there should be no conflicts with the trust council policies

[1:16:50] Voice 1: but in the end they do have there's different duties and responsibilities between trust council

[1:16:56] Voice 1: and the local trust committee thank

[1:17:00] Voice 4: you for that i appreciate the distinction between

[1:17:02] Voice 4: consistent and not you know and not conflicting and i think you phrased it better than i did

[1:17:09] Voice 4: That's what I'm trying to get at. It's actually not conflicting. And I take your point. I understand it. Of course, we've got quite a bit of discretion here at the local level in terms of how enforcement is actually executed.

[1:17:22] Voice 4: in that respect

[1:17:25] Voice 4: I've gone through this policy

[1:17:30] Voice 4: I may have missed it

[1:17:32] Voice 4: but

[1:17:36] Voice 4: perhaps

[1:17:37] Voice 4: it may not be in this

[1:17:41] Voice 4: policy explicitly

[1:17:42] Voice 4: but it may be there implicitly

[1:17:45] Voice 4: and what I want to

[1:17:47] Voice 4: get at is a practice of

[1:17:48] Voice 4: enforcement group

[1:17:51] Voice 4: in Gambier

[1:17:52] Voice 4: in the Gambier Crest Area

[1:17:54] Voice 4: if you're

[1:17:56] Voice 4: a bylaw enforcement officer

[1:17:58] Voice 4: discovers a contravention while

[1:17:59] Voice 4: investigating a complaint

[1:18:02] Voice 4: and

[1:18:04] Voice 4: discovers a different infraction

[1:18:06] Voice 4: whether it's on the property that was subject

[1:18:08] Voice 4: to the original complaint or another property

[1:18:10] Voice 4: doesn't make any difference for the purpose of the question

[1:18:12] Voice 4: what is

[1:18:14] Voice 4: under this policy, what would the

[1:18:16] Voice 4: approach be of the bylaw

[1:18:18] Voice 4: enforcement officer

[1:18:20] Voice 4: if they discover an infraction

[1:18:22] Voice 4: or a contravention or

[1:18:23] Voice 4: an episode of non-compliance

[1:18:25] Voice 4: that nobody's complained about but you essentially stumbled over it what is what's the approach

[1:18:33] Voice 4: so

[1:18:34] Voice 1: currently it's to fall back to trust council policies on the opening of files

[1:18:40] Voice 1: where it does reference you know if there's some environmental concern work and development

[1:18:45] Voice 1: permit areas health and safety concerns and advertising and unlawful use then the

[1:18:51] Voice 1: the file officer could open up another file and investigate that matter but within this policy

[1:18:57] Voice 1: and i believe we have done it for other local trust areas there is a reference to restricting

[1:19:03] Voice 1: the enforcement to the complaint so narrow the scope of the work uh within the within this policy

[1:19:13] Voice 1: uh to have a narrow view and not you know try and look at all contraventions on the property

[1:19:22] Voice 1: Say where if you have a site, and this is policy really anyway,

[1:19:25] Voice 1: if we go to a property and it's all about siting,

[1:19:27] Voice 1: we're looking at siting, we're not looking at land use, right?

[1:19:32] Voice 1: But you could adopt a language like that where you're restricting here.

[1:19:37] Voice 1: This is what we want the enforcement staff to look at.

[1:19:39] Voice 1: We want them to have a narrow focus, deal with the subject of the complaint

[1:19:44] Voice 1: and not go taking a broad look

[1:19:48] Voice 1: and trying to find every possible complaint to enforce on.

[1:19:52] Voice 1: They may document these other contraventions, but you could certainly, within your own policy, say you're going to have a narrow focus when we're doing our enforcement work.

[1:20:01] Voice 4: Well, we don't have that in this draft at this point.

[1:20:05] Voice 1: That's correct. You don't. I could draft up some language for a future meeting that could address that concern.

[1:20:12] Voice 1: uh

[1:20:15] Voice 4: i uh you know i've spent a lot of time that's just one last remark for the benefit of

[1:20:21] Voice 4: the committee um i think uh i think it would be a good idea to ask management to come up with

[1:20:29] Voice 4: languages on those lines but i want to be upfront saying uh in my own mind i'm not

[1:20:36] Voice 4: um i'm not convinced one way or the other whether or not that that is um a desirable

[1:20:44] Voice 4: terrible amendment or not i have to put some thought into it but i would like us in fact to

[1:20:49] Voice 4: address it which is why i would like manager dingman to proceed with bringing that forward

[1:20:56] Voice 4: to the next meeting for discussion purposes because the scope of bylaw enforcement is a

[1:21:04] Voice 4: line issue across the trust area we need to think about it

[1:21:07] Voice 11: um well i i i see this as sort of

[1:21:14] Voice 11: of how do we move this forward it's of interest but yes looking at the details as they come back

[1:21:20] Voice 11: it's where i want to be able to sort of really be able to understand the implications one of

[1:21:25] Voice 11: the things that i've been looking at on this one is 7.5 on page 90 of the package

[1:21:31] Voice 11: if it is determined during an investigation that the complaint was frivolous repeat or

[1:21:36] Voice 11: vexatious in nature the manager of bylaw compliance and enforcement can use their discretion

[1:21:42] Voice 11: to close the file unless there is work in a development permit area or work in an environmentally

[1:21:48] Voice 11: sensitive area or their health and safety concerns. I think that makes a lot of sense.

[1:21:55] Voice 11: What I'm thinking about is, is there any, would the trustees be informed in any way or is there

[1:22:07] Voice 11: there any connection with the committee that there seems to be frivolous um uh complaints coming

[1:22:15] Voice 11: forward is there any reason to have the committee aware of that or is it sits strictly within the

[1:22:22] Voice 11: um officer so

[1:22:27] Voice 1: i think chair that's something that the local trust committee must decide

[1:22:31] Voice 1: whether or not they want to do say what denman and main do and receive full reports on files

[1:22:38] Voice 1: with completed investigations and then the local trust committee decides whether themselves whether

[1:22:44] Voice 1: or not enforcement's going to proceed you could adopt those measures and with that you would

[1:22:49] Voice 1: receive regular reports uh for the files and then you know in the end you could we'll deliver the

[1:22:56] Voice 1: report to you and if we say okay we believe this is a vexatious complaint the files can be closed

[1:23:02] Voice 1: then you can close the file as a local trust committee but that that's what some of the other

[1:23:09] Voice 1: islands are doing that's what denman and maine ltcs are doing they're reviewing the files before

[1:23:15] Voice 1: there's actual uh moving forward with actual enforcement on the different property owners

[1:23:21] Voice 1: and their contraventions just

[1:23:24] Voice 11: a clarification but specifically to potentially vexatious

[1:23:31] Voice 11: complaints not all complaints so

[1:23:34] Voice 1: those local trust committees do all complaints

[1:23:36] Voice 1: if the ltc wants to limit it say these are the issues that you wish to have reports on

[1:23:42] Voice 1: then you could put that into this policy yeah

[1:23:45] Voice 11: yeah i i would be uh concerned about uh having

[1:23:51] Voice 11: discretion over all complaints making that would make it more political in nature whereas i see

[1:23:58] Voice 11: most complaints are regulatory um so i would be interested in in that like moving in that

[1:24:07] Voice 11: direction that it would just be specific vexatious complaints that we'd have further oversight over

[1:24:15] Voice 11: um i'm not ready to put motions to those specific subjects but i'm willing to move

[1:24:23] Voice 11: the recommendation if

[1:24:25] Voice 4: i can't follow up to address the discussion you can see san francis

[1:24:30] Voice 4: um yeah i mean uh i have reservations about the local trust committee assuming as

[1:24:41] Voice 4: uh as comprehensive an oversight function as seems to be happening in other local trust areas

[1:24:47] Voice 4: is the reason I have reservations about that is there needs to be real independence in terms of

[1:24:58] Voice 4: the exercise of judgment on the part of bylaw enforcement officers. I think the LTC should be

[1:25:05] Voice 4: available in a sense as an appeal body before residents if they feel there's an enforcement

[1:25:13] Voice 4: matter that's gone off the rails. In circumstances like that, I think it should always be open and

[1:25:20] Voice 4: is open for a resident to come for the local trust committee but if we're in the role of being

[1:25:25] Voice 4: you know fairly comprehensively exercising oversight we're then really being asked to

[1:25:32] Voice 4: revisit our own past judgments that gets us complicated uh but i do agree that i think

[1:25:38] Voice 4: it would be useful to build in a reporting function with respect to files that are closed

[1:25:44] Voice 4: for the reason that the the complaint was ill-founded or vexatious and that's just useful

[1:25:58] Voice 4: information to have for the local trust committee to know that that episode took place i don't see

[1:26:05] Voice 4: that as being necessarily a thing where it's because you know we would want to weigh in over

[1:26:12] Voice 4: whether or not it is vexatious or not i would just like to know what's happening and as trustee

[1:26:19] Voice 4: stanford pointed out we don't have the language for that now but i think it's something that we

[1:26:24] Voice 4: could work in at a subsequent meeting and once we've developed that but subject to what the

[1:26:32] Voice 4: other trustees are thinking i do see this proposal to get to adopt this policy i'd be able to support

[1:26:41] Voice 4: that on the understanding that we're going to be tweaking it pretty soon you know here and there

[1:26:46] Voice 4: but especially the the business about creating a structure and formality with respect to

[1:26:52] Voice 4: inspections of properties and premises i think it's very useful to document that

[1:26:57] Voice 4: i can

[1:26:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): tell you that i'm also chairing the gabriella island they adopted the policy

[1:27:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): they've made they've made a couple of tweaks to the policy because it is your policy you

[1:27:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): can change this policy upon as you understand what needs to change so how would you like to proceed

[1:27:17] Voice 11: um stanford um i'd like to move some recommendations as presented on page 86

[1:27:23] Voice 11: so um i moved that the gambier island local trust committee adopted proposed bylaw compliance

[1:27:29] Voice 11: compliance and enforcement policy but it's going to come back to us

[1:27:35] Voice 11: HAB-Masyn Moyer- That's right.

[1:27:36] Voice 11: HAB

[1:27:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): -Masyn Moyer- You could then ask for a subsequent motion for further reporting that you could then amend the policy of the late state so.

[1:27:44] Voice 4: HAB-Masyn Moyer- Well, well, we know we can amend the policy later date, I think, after we go through this, I think what we need is a third motion, where we request manager Damon to prepare language with respect to the.

[1:28:00] Voice 4: restraint that we talked about before about opening files and also the language that

[1:28:05] Voice 4: trustee stanford was talking about

[1:28:07] Voice 11: so we come back to that we we might be able to do that

[1:28:11] Voice 11: if we have lunch break and then we'd be able to provide that language right away i don't know

[1:28:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): could i'll look to to uh manager dingman is that language available now to amend the document

[1:28:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): before we approve it or would that happen at a subsequent meeting how

[1:28:27] Voice 1: much time do i have

[1:28:30] Voice 4: I haven't. I was anticipating we would do it at a subsequent meeting. I don't want to have to rush or anything. I don't want to manage or take that erasing.

[1:28:38] Voice 11: Okay, so I'll do the first two.

[1:28:41] Voice 11: Okay,

[1:28:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): we're going to do it as a sub, and everybody will come back for a subsequent meeting. So there'll be a third motion coming in a few moments. So, okay, carry on.

[1:28:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I've got the

[1:28:50] Voice 11: first recommendation, adopt the proposed bylaw compliance enforcement policy, as I said before.

[1:28:56] Voice 11: Is there a

[1:28:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): second by Trustee Bernardo, any discussion?

[1:28:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'll call the vote. All those in favor?

[1:29:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): That carries.

[1:29:08] Voice 7: Perhaps

[1:29:11] Voice 4: we could discuss the standing resolutions issue.

[1:29:14] Voice 4: If we rescind those standing resolutions,

[1:29:18] Voice 4: my understanding that's only necessary as a housekeeping measure

[1:29:22] Voice 4: because by adopting the policy, we're adopting 4.0,

[1:29:27] Voice 4: which are the priorities which recapitulate the effect of those standing resolutions.

[1:29:33] Voice 11: Is

[1:29:33] Voice 4: that correct, Manager Bigman?

[1:29:36] Voice 1: Yes, it is.

[1:29:37] Voice 1: It is just, it's a housekeeping item.

[1:29:39] Voice 1: It's not

[1:29:39] Voice 1: necessary for you to rescind these,

[1:29:41] Voice 1: but it becomes redundant to have them

[1:29:43] Voice 1: now that you, if you're going to move forward

[1:29:45] Voice 1: with these policies.

[1:29:47] Voice 4: Yeah, yeah, I prefer to tell you so.

[1:29:50] Voice 4: So I

[1:29:51] Voice 11: will move that the Gambier Island

[1:29:53] Voice 11: Local Trust Committee rescinds standing resolutions

[1:29:55] Voice 11: GM 2023-001 and GM 2020.

[1:30:00] Voice 11: is there

[1:30:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): a second second by trustee bernardo any discussions all the vote all those in favor

[1:30:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): that carries can you break all right um well do you want to take a break now yep okay we're

[1:30:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): going to take a break and

[1:30:17] Voice 19: then we'll have a motion to request to come up sorry i was just

[1:30:20] Voice 19: wondering i have an applicant that will oh so i'm just wondering for timing for them

[1:30:24] Voice 19: that's true we did have the applicant going before we took a break so

[1:30:29] Voice 19: Exactly.

[1:30:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay. Do you want to move on to that? You're

[1:30:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): anxious to take a break?

[1:30:34] Voice 4: Well, we have this matter in front of us now and, you know, I don't want to

[1:30:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): take

[1:30:39] Voice 4: up too much

[1:30:40] Voice 4: managing this time here. So can we just recess briefly for five minutes so that I can see if

[1:30:46] Voice 4: I can just whip up some language to provide something we can do to manage our demand to

[1:30:52] Voice 4: do that work? Does

[1:30:53] Voice 11: that work for everyone? Yeah. So five minutes and then come back. Yes.

[1:30:57] Voice 11: that's good or we'll do

[1:31:00] Planner (probable): that after lunch and then yeah the application yes

[1:31:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): we'll look things around

[1:31:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): there being flexible as we go so take a break try to finish this item then go to the application

[1:31:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): okay so i'm just taking a short recess but

[1:31:16] Voice 5: i've had um some snacks brought in

[1:36:55] Voice 5: Okay,

[1:36:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustees, we're going to, if we can bring her back to the meeting.

[1:37:03] Voice 5: We're just

[1:37:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): going to proceed here with the meeting. We're back on the meeting.

[1:37:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): You guys can chat over there. Chat quietly back that way.

[1:37:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, I'm going to turn to Trustee Bernardo.

[1:37:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes.

[1:37:19] Voice 4: I think it covered that. I move that the staff prepare for the Gambier Local Trust Committee's next meeting

[1:37:31] Voice 7: a

[1:37:32] Voice 4: draft request for a decision to amend the bylaw compliance that affords that policy to, one, limit investigations to only those interactions specifically identified in a complaint.

[1:37:48] Voice 4: to require staff to report to the local trust committee

[1:37:51] Voice 4: any files closed due to their vexatious nature.

[1:37:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): Let's give Lisa a moment.

[1:37:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): She probably, there were some noise too.

[1:37:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): So Lisa.

[1:38:00] Voice 23: I'm sorry, Chair Patrick, there was some people talking

[1:38:03] Voice 23: and I missed most of that.

[1:38:05] Voice 23: All

[1:38:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): right, well, we're going to,

[1:38:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): we can just have some quiet here for a moment.

[1:38:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): So our benefit here,

[1:38:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): you're going to have to repeat that nice and slow,

[1:38:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo.

[1:38:15] Voice 4: Okay, I'll do that now.

[1:38:17] Voice 4: I move that the staff prepare for the Gambler Local Trust Committee's next meeting.

[1:38:25] Voice 4: Draft requests for decision to amend the bylaw compliance and enforcement policy to, one, limit investigations with only those infractions specifically identified in a complaint.

[1:38:42] Voice 4: 2. Require staff to report to the local press committee any files closed due to their vexatious nature.

[1:39:00] Voice 23: Thank you, Chair. Could you repeat point one again?

[1:39:06] Voice 4: Yes. Point one is limit investigations to only those infractions specifically identified in a complaint.

[1:39:19] Voice 22: Thank you. I have that. Excellent.

[1:39:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): excellent are we as a staff i'll look to uh to manager dingman is that clear yes chair no

[1:39:32] Voice 1: problems all

[1:39:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): right is there a second to that motion seconded by trustee stanford are there

[1:39:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): any is there any discussion trustee stanford so

[1:39:39] Voice 11: one of the things i just want to be clear on and

[1:39:42] Voice 11: i think it is in this policy that yes we stick to the specific complaint but if there's issues

[1:39:50] Voice 11: around environment and safety that they are exempt from this um

[1:39:57] Voice 4: right uh as i mentioned before um

[1:40:03] Voice 4: with respect to that first point that limitation point uh i think trustee stanford's concern is

[1:40:09] Voice 4: something about when we discuss that particular item we're just asking for the language here as

[1:40:13] Voice 4: i mentioned before uh i don't have complete thoughts myself about the scope of that or

[1:40:19] Voice 4: whether it's a great idea but i think we we do need to discuss it and uh the content of what

[1:40:28] Voice 4: that limitation is i think we can develop later i don't think we do it now and in fact we may not do

[1:40:35] Voice 4: it at all yeah

[1:40:35] Voice 14: yeah so

[1:40:37] Voice 4: i i'm only proposing both of these for strictly discussion purposes and

[1:40:41] Voice 4: we'll put some heavier thought into it when we get to it

[1:40:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): any further discussion

[1:40:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): all those in favor that carries so there's no further business on this item on the bike we're

[1:40:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): gonna we're gonna uh wait to come back to 12.2 i'm sorry for jumping around on the agenda but

[1:41:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): we're just trying to work on our applicant that's here i'm going to skip uh backwards

[1:41:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): forward here again we're going to go to item 9.1 before

[1:41:12] Voice 4: you do that sure yes i'd just like to thank

[1:41:13] Voice 4: Thank you, Manager Dingman, for the work that's put in today, advancing this policy, documenting these things.

[1:41:21] Voice 4: It's long overdue, and it's great to see this.

[1:41:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes, thank you, Manager Dingman, for bringing this work to us.

[1:41:29] Voice 1: You're welcome, Chair.

[1:41:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, item 9.1, it's Development Variance Permit 2025-01-170.

[1:41:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): There's a staff report on page 29, so we'll give everyone a moment to go back to that page.

[1:41:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): so page 29 and i'll let the staff present the report

[1:41:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): so

[1:41:49] Planner (probable): the recommendation is that uh approval of the development variance permit uh pldbp

[1:41:59] Planner (probable): 2025-0170 which would vary the required setback from the natural boundary from 15 meters to 4.33

[1:42:07] Planner (probable): meters this variance is specific to a roof line alteration of an existing non-conforming dwelling

[1:42:14] Planner (probable): And it does not expand the horizontal footprint of the structure, but it will be altering it vertically.

[1:42:22] Planner (probable): So the purpose, the applicant seeks a reconfiguration of the roof line to consolidate and simplify the building's roof form.

[1:42:29] Planner (probable): The change is occurring within the existing footprint.

[1:42:32] Planner (probable): And the applicant notes that the proposed changes actually will result in a net decrease in volume because they are removing a deck and a few pop outs from the side.

[1:42:44] Planner (probable): of the building as well so the dwelling is already non-conforming in terms of its

[1:42:50] Planner (probable): sighting within the required setback it was built many years ago uh this just so that the

[1:42:55] Planner (probable): ltc is clear the ddp does not legalize the entire structure but only allows for the proposed roofline

[1:43:02] Planner (probable): modification and the application follows a building permit referral from the sunshine

[1:43:08] Planner (probable): coast regional district so the change increases the vertical mapping but as i mentioned it removes

[1:43:16] Planner (probable): Other non-conforming features such as south-facing pop-outs, deck portions on the east and north side, and an enclosed floor area on the north side.

[1:43:27] Planner (probable): Notification was provided to surrounding neighbors within 100 meters.

[1:43:31] Planner (probable): No objections have been received to date.

[1:43:35] Planner (probable): there was one letter of support that was sent in yesterday from a neighbor

[1:43:41] Planner (probable): and uh the rationale to support the recommendations or that the request is reasonable given the

[1:43:46] Planner (probable): existing non-conforming um citing of the dwelling and the application follows the proper process and

[1:43:54] Planner (probable): was submitted prior to construction

[1:43:55] Voice 14: and the

[1:43:57] Planner (probable): applicant is on the line i believe if there's

[1:43:59] Planner (probable): any options

[1:43:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): um hello to the applicant this is your opportunity is there anything you'd like to add

[1:44:05] Voice 15: uh how's my audio can you hear me we

[1:44:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): can hear you

[1:44:08] Voice 15: excellent no I think that was Marlis was

[1:44:11] Voice 15: that Marlis speaking yes

[1:44:12] Voice 14: yeah

[1:44:13] Voice 15: just uh good afternoon everybody uh my name is Dusty Moy

[1:44:17] Voice 15: and I'm the owner of the variants of subject that we're discussing thank you very much Marlis I know

[1:44:24] Voice 15: you've put a lot of effort and worked your schedule to go through the material and have it ready to

[1:44:30] Voice 15: present today so um really appreciate that and that's that's really the the summary is yeah we

[1:44:37] Voice 15: are managing a renovation that is uh legal pre-existing non-conforming about 75 percent

[1:44:43] Voice 15: of the cabin is within the 15 meter setback so the team architect structural engineer

[1:44:51] Voice 15: experienced contractor myself you know we've approached this whole process being very

[1:44:57] Voice 15: cognizant of the requirements and the situation we're in. It's a very old cabin that is

[1:45:05] Voice 15: long overdue for being addressed, an upgrade, so it can be a healthy, safe place to live for

[1:45:16] Voice 15: hopefully many generations moving forward. The structural design is really specific,

[1:45:25] Voice 15: specific addressing upgraded seismic requirements. So terminology such as, you know, aligning the

[1:45:33] Voice 15: form, we are removing what we say is several non-conforming components. And overall, like we do

[1:45:42] Voice 15: realize, yes, the roofline extension for, say, structural consistency is an encroachment,

[1:45:51] Voice 15: but there is a net volume reduction.

[1:45:55] Voice 15: It's smaller square footage and a smaller volume

[1:45:58] Voice 15: by a couple of hundred cubic feet.

[1:46:01] Voice 15: And how we request that our application

[1:46:06] Voice 15: is reviewed favorably.

[1:46:08] Voice 15: And if there's any specific questions,

[1:46:10] Voice 15: happy to discuss and get into detail,

[1:46:12] Voice 15: any detail that we need to.

[1:46:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, well, thank you very much.

[1:46:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm gonna open the floor now for questions

[1:46:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): from the trustees, Trustee Bernardo.

[1:46:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): I

[1:46:20] Voice 4: don't have any questions for the applicant, but you have a couple of questions for the staff.

[1:46:26] Voice 4: Planner McArter, when you were describing the situation, you mentioned that what we're being asked to, we're not being asked to legalize the other non-conforming aspects or the siting of it.

[1:46:39] Voice 4: But correct me if I'm wrong, but that's actually not necessary because if the building was built a long time ago, I'm inferring this is it's illegally non-conforming already.

[1:46:49] Voice 4: already we

[1:46:50] Planner (probable): call it non-conforming so yes it is allowed to stay there if the building burnt down

[1:46:55] Planner (probable): they would not be allowed to rebuild it in that current isn't

[1:46:58] Voice 4: the technical term legally

[1:47:00] Voice 4: non-conforming because that's the land act uses that language or something

[1:47:04] Planner (probable): I believe it's not

[1:47:06] Planner (probable): conforming but all right yeah so there's

[1:47:09] Planner (probable): very specific requirements um around what they can

[1:47:12] Planner (probable): and can't do to that building even with the non-conforming status right

[1:47:15] Voice 4: yeah well they're

[1:47:17] Voice 4: They're subject to the development permit requirements, right?

[1:47:21] Voice 4: They're subject to the limitations emerged from the development permit area requirements

[1:47:28] Voice 4: because it's cited there.

[1:47:30] Voice 4: Is that right?

[1:47:31] Planner (probable): Well, no.

[1:47:32] Planner (probable): So any change or alteration to the building aside from sort of minor regulations or minor

[1:47:39] Planner (probable): renovations, things that are laid out that are very specific to that building would require

[1:47:43] Planner (probable): development variance permits because they're not conforming to the current bylaw.

[1:47:47] Planner (probable): So even though the building was built many years ago and it is non-conforming and allowed to stay there, any alteration to the building of a certain percentage or degree would need a development variance permit.

[1:48:03] Voice 4: Right. Well, that leads actually to my second question, which is when I was looking at the language for the new proposed development permit area that's in here to be worked into the Canberra OCP thing.

[1:48:18] Voice 4: The exemption number four there contemplates repair replacement, but also building alterations, so that it exempts the requirement to apply for a development permit with respect to those alterations to a pre-existing building that's sited within the development permit area.

[1:48:41] Voice 4: Would this application be unnecessary under that regime?

[1:48:46] Voice 4: well

[1:48:48] Planner (probable): so they're they're deemed to be increasing the non-conformity so that's the that's kind of

[1:48:54] Planner (probable): the board all right thank you any

[1:48:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): other questions hostess damper um

[1:49:01] Voice 11: i have a question to the

[1:49:02] Voice 11: applicant um on page 39 under 2.0 purpose of variance of the last sentence it says

[1:49:11] Voice 11: based on recent feedback the design has been adjusted to exclude any exposed area under the

[1:49:16] Voice 11: dogs under the

[1:49:18] Voice 11: deck where um what was that kind of feedback was it from professional feedback or

[1:49:24] Voice 11: neighbors or what was

[1:49:25] Voice 15: it review island's trust application review feedback so okay it has been

[1:49:32] Voice 15: removed and basically if i can describe it is um underneath the deck on the original design we were

[1:49:40] Voice 15: proposing to like fence in and wrap the underside of the deck

[1:49:44] Voice 15: so that

[1:49:45] Voice 15: would that technically would have increased the square footage so we've removed

[1:49:50] Voice 15: that from the design yeah

[1:49:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): any other questions i think

[1:49:56] Voice 11: covered it yeah

[1:49:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustees how would you

[1:49:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): like to proceed there are resolutions on page 29 trustee stanford yeah that's quite the comprehensive

[1:50:06] Voice 11: comprehensive report

[1:50:07] Voice 11: and i would like to speak to this once i get to it sorry i'm just trying

[1:50:22] Voice 11: to get to page 29 i

[1:50:23] Voice 5: can move it you want no

[1:50:26] Voice 11: i want to move it i move that the gambieron

[1:50:33] Voice 11: local trust committee approve issuance of pl dvp 2025 1070 is there a second i said by trustee

[1:50:41] Voice 11: bernardo any discussion trustee stanford um one of the things that i reading through this

[1:50:49] Voice 11: particular development variance request is um many of us on gambier know this particular

[1:50:58] Voice 11: property and a lot of the things that we're having concerns about in bylaws in general

[1:51:08] Voice 11: this is a good example of how planning can work and how we manage variances so i've been asked

[1:51:15] Voice 11: about well why do not old buildings not be covered by step four three or why not people that are

[1:51:21] Voice 11: living in old buildings uh have these bylaw infractions imposed on them it's when you come

[1:51:29] Voice 11: to do something with your old building that you then have to come into compliance and and this is

[1:51:37] Voice 11: how it works quite well um there is a comprehensive support report here but there's a lot of moving

[1:51:44] Voice 11: parts there's a lot of different things to think about this older property has is very small has

[1:51:51] Voice 11: two buildings on it um most of the building is within a setback that was created 20 plus years

[1:51:59] Voice 11: years ago uh and yet it's still set up for people to be able to manage it and be able to live in it

[1:52:07] Voice 11: using modern standards and using our planning processes to get it to a point where they aren't

[1:52:16] Voice 11: concerned about having to deal with bylaw infractions um i think it works very well

[1:52:22] Voice 11: Well, I am in support of allowing them to be able to change their roofline.

[1:52:27] Voice 11: And I also was happy to see that neighbors also recognized where this is.

[1:52:34] Voice 11: And it would be nice to see that this older cottage is brought up to a standard that, to me anyway, looks more safe and modern.

[1:52:45] Voice 11: And will withstand being a low bank residence in the years to come.

[1:52:51] Voice 11: So I am definitely in favor of this.

[1:52:56] Voice 11: Any further discussion?

[1:52:58] Voice 4: Yes, I would just like to follow up by agreeing with Trustee Stanford that, you know,

[1:53:03] Voice 4: it's an important part of the job of thinking through these types of situations and these situations arise because it is impossible to devise any bylaw that can perfectly encompass every situation.

[1:53:22] Voice 4: moments come where discretion is required to be exercised whether we're going to vary the

[1:53:29] Voice 4: application of development requirements or not this is one of them uh i think just trustee

[1:53:35] Voice 4: sanford was right to point out to the you know some of the comments that we've heard

[1:53:40] Voice 4: of a comment period that um yeah we do have to describe to be flexible and we will be when it

[1:53:46] Voice 4: makes sense and we have to hear it out and we have to know what all the different elements are which

[1:53:52] Voice 4: is why the staff is there engages with the applicant but in this instance i think you know

[1:53:58] Voice 4: the report that we've seen the staff is so comprehensive covers everything very helpful and

[1:54:04] Voice 4: um i think that also would be the justice center there's no objection to this variance it's well

[1:54:11] Voice 4: grounded and i would support further

[1:54:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor that carries

[1:54:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): so thank you very much to the applicant for being here today good luck with your project and

[1:54:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): that i think we're going to take a break for 30 minutes is that the one all right so we'll take

[1:54:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): a break uh for three minutes and return here uh at uh 1 30. thank you everyone i

[1:54:37] Voice 3: have a question

[1:54:38] Voice 3: I just ran out to use the Washington.

[1:54:40] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:54:40] Voice 3: Thank you, everybody.

[2:31:36] Voice 5: all

[2:31:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): right everyone we're uh back from our break thank you everyone and it's such a beautiful day

[2:31:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): in the warm outside uh so i guess we're going to proceed as we had reassigned before so we're

[2:31:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): going back to sorry for jumping around on the agenda there's no pages with this one but it's

[2:31:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): 12.2 accessory building bylaw regulations verbal discussion who was leading this conversation

[2:32:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): the staff can introduce it.

[2:32:12] Voice 23: Chair Patrick?

[2:32:14] Voice 23: Yes.

[2:32:15] Voice 23: I need to ask if you called the question on the last motion before we went for a break.

[2:32:20] Voice 23: I didn't, I heard it moved and seconded.

[2:32:23] Voice 23: And I might have missed that but I didn't.

[2:32:26] Voice 23: I

[2:32:26] Voice 9: know I, we did carry it was a, we carried.

[2:32:29] Voice 9: Yeah.

[2:32:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[2:32:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[2:32:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): So, accessory building

[2:32:35] Planner (probable): by law regulations.

[2:32:36] Planner (probable): Yeah, I can sort of give a brief introduction. So it's been an issue that's come up through bylaw enforcement. And so basically, it's not related to the building code, but the issue being that accessory structures or accessory buildings like sheds and workshops are not permitted without a principal dwelling.

[2:33:02] Planner (probable): So unless the principal use has been established on the lot, the by-law doesn't allow for accessory

[2:33:08] Planner (probable): buildings or structures to be built.

[2:33:10] Planner (probable): And so this is a time where the LTC can consider whether this would be worth reviewing these

[2:33:19] Planner (probable): regulations for accessory building and adding it to the current OCP LUB project.

[2:33:26] Planner (probable): project. So this would just be looking at what are the potential benefits or drawback

[2:33:32] Planner (probable): of allowing an accessory building before principal dwelling. So before someone's living on the

[2:33:38] Planner (probable): lot, this wouldn't be permitting people to live in the accessory building, but they could

[2:33:43] Planner (probable): store their boats or kayaks or recreational equipment. They might want to store tools

[2:33:49] Planner (probable): or whatever people might need to use their properties recreationally. It is something

[2:33:55] Planner (probable): something that is permitted on other islands um so yeah I think that now is sort of the opportunity

[2:34:02] Planner (probable): for the LTC to consider whether that's um something that they're interested in staff

[2:34:07] Planner (probable): looking a little bit more into whether that would be appropriate on this island or not

[2:34:13] Voice 11: I'm going to start um I always thought that's how it worked because I guess I was looking at

[2:34:21] Voice 11: the associated island bylaws which i remember working with sonia a long time ago those are

[2:34:29] Voice 11: our newest bylaws for the area um and it is quite clear in there that you can allow a small structure

[2:34:35] Voice 11: of some kind but in even in that set of bylaws you have

[2:34:42] Voice 11: to have principal dwelling application

[2:34:44] Voice 11: location yeah no

[2:34:47] Planner (probable): in those ones there so there's certain buildings like on gambier that if you have

[2:34:52] Planner (probable): a building permanent submitted or approved building permit you would you are allowed to build

[2:34:58] Planner (probable): um basically like a workshop or a storage facility for the

[2:35:02] Planner (probable): materials you have that now and so i

[2:35:04] Planner (probable): believe something like that exists on the associated islands as well but they also have a regulation

[2:35:08] Planner (probable): that permit yeah separate to that that you are allowed i think there's size restrictions and

[2:35:14] Planner (probable): and other regulations that you'd have to follow,

[2:35:16] Planner (probable): but that you would be allowed

[2:35:18] Planner (probable): sort of small recreation building.

[2:35:20] Voice 11: But you're not allowed to live in it.

[2:35:23] Voice 11: So, no, sorry, I didn't have any questions.

[2:35:26] Voice 11: We'll do it later, Andrea.

[2:35:31] Voice 11: So in that case, like it makes sense

[2:35:37] Voice 11: because of how people use these properties.

[2:35:41] Voice 11: I think there will always be that overlap

[2:35:44] Voice 11: of people living in them and for the most part people are taking care of themselves

[2:35:50] Voice 11: but there is that always that vulnerability and that's where the occupancy permit comes in comes

[2:35:57] Planner (probable): in is that right yeah they i mean if they're the bylaw wouldn't commit living in they wouldn't

[2:36:05] Planner (probable): be dwellings they wouldn't

[2:36:06] Planner (probable): have kitchens they wouldn't have bathrooms um they're just you know

[2:36:10] Planner (probable): storage buildings or you know that would be up to the ltc ltc to sort of find those parameters

[2:36:16] Planner (probable): um so they wouldn't be considered a dwelling they'd be considered an accessory building and

[2:36:20] Planner (probable): then further to that they wouldn't wouldn't get an occupancy permit under the bc building code

[2:36:26] Planner (probable): wouldn't be permitted to live in them okay but also under our bylaws wouldn't be permitted to

[2:36:30] Planner (probable): live in them okay

[2:36:31] Voice 11: and i'm just i'm just trying to it's okay unless um so i know on keats there's a

[2:36:38] Voice 11: a situation where somebody's put in a per gold on one property and that was an issue because it was

[2:36:48] Voice 11: a structure without having a principal dwelling um is that the kind of thing we're trying to move

[2:36:55] Voice 11: around we

[2:36:57] Planner (probable): would be that similar to be able to see to define what is you know really needed here

[2:37:03] Planner (probable): whether yeah whether it's picnic structures for people to come and enjoy that you know like a

[2:37:08] Planner (probable): pergola or um or whether it's for storing tools and equipment and um so that'd be really i don't

[2:37:17] Planner (probable): know really what these issues are

[2:37:19] Voice 11: so those are things that we could discuss yeah in terms of

[2:37:22] Voice 11: moving forward in an ocp but that if we look at this as a an ocp direction that helps have those

[2:37:30] Voice 11: conversation as to what would work yeah and what are the gaps like what what could the problems be

[2:37:39] Voice 5: yeah um yeah thank you

[2:37:43] Voice 4: um now both the land use bylaw or not the language book lots actually i

[2:37:49] Voice 4: think i think we're just dealing with the standing resolution which has now been incorporated into

[2:37:54] Voice 4: the bylaw enforcement uh policy um i think that exception for keats is quite limited in the sense

[2:38:03] Voice 4: sense that it allows an accessory dwelling to be on a property uh provided that properties adjacent

[2:38:10] Voice 4: to another property that has a dwelling and both are owned by the same person that's kind of a

[2:38:15] Voice 4: pretty special purpose issue and when we heard some of the public comments earlier today that's

[2:38:21] Voice 4: a whole other category of issue and I think it's um but it's the there's an issue there about what

[2:38:32] Voice 4: the meaning of accessory is here uh there's dwellings then there's accessories to dwellings

[2:38:38] Voice 4: the kind of examples you get before boathouses sheds that kind of thing and then you know we

[2:38:44] Voice 4: could get the concept of an accessory dwelling you know which is the you have a principal dwelling

[2:38:49] Voice 4: but then you have a you know you know a buck house or something like that and certainly we've got

[2:38:55] Voice 4: that for videos in the lightning spiral i know the keys i don't know if the lightning spiral here is

[2:39:00] Voice 4: but then i think what we're dealing with with the immediate issue that's confronting some property

[2:39:04] Voice 4: owners here on gambier is they just have very small dwellings that it seems at least over the

[2:39:11] Voice 4: strd they're having trouble figuring out how to characterize so if they're actual dwellings

[2:39:19] Voice 4: how do we characterize it like a 500 square foot building that somebody lives in and has

[2:39:25] Voice 4: the very basics in it. Do we characterize that for the purposes of interpreting our

[2:39:31] Voice 4: bylaws as an accessory something or is it just a small well?

[2:39:36] Planner (probable): It would if it's the only

[2:39:38] Planner (probable): if it's just a building with a kitchen then there's one building it would be just the primary

[2:39:43] Planner (probable): principal dwelling. Okay yeah so

[2:39:46] Voice 11: it doesn't matter about size it's just what's in it how it's

[2:39:50] Voice 11: constructed um and what i understand again it keeps sliding over to what uh the occupancy part

[2:39:59] Voice 11: of it what i understand is if you sleep in a building like including a bunkie then that in

[2:40:06] Voice 11: terms of permitting requires an occupancy that's what i've heard but again a lot of this stuff is

[2:40:12] Voice 11: what i hear i'm not sure how it fits yeah

[2:40:16] Voice 11: that would be building

[2:40:17] Planner (probable): code stuff i would sort of

[2:40:19] Planner (probable): make the same assumption

[2:40:20] Voice 11: that if you're

[2:40:20] Planner (probable): sleeping in a building it would need to be fit for occupancy

[2:40:24] Planner (probable): but and so that includes

[2:40:26] Voice 11: structures like bunkies and i know we all have these things that's that's

[2:40:32] Voice 11: part of the struggle that we're having is you know we're all living fairly sensibly and we have

[2:40:40] Voice 11: these little structures that know it's not hurting anybody and it's just we've been caught up in a

[2:40:45] Voice 11: bit of a net on specific situations so how do we loosen it up to the point where people have some

[2:40:55] Voice 11: flexibility in moving

[2:40:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): this forward well that would be that's the potential for the opportunity for

[2:41:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): this project is if

[2:41:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): this is a dialogue a question what is it you know that needs to be defined what

[2:41:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): what is exactly the issue how can it resolve what aspects of it through this project and the project

[2:41:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): being the official community current trustee

[2:41:18] Voice 4: bernardo right yeah i was i wasn't looking at

[2:41:20] Voice 4: so much of the ocp and go as you know you know juggling some of the things that we've heard

[2:41:26] Voice 4: working today about you know there are residents on gander who are clearly having some difficulty

[2:41:36] Voice 4: through the SCRD and its interpretation of the building code its applicability and it really

[2:41:42] Voice 4: isn't our area of responsibility but if we can help the SCRD gets us some clearer thinking of

[2:41:49] Voice 4: the issue I'm just wondering if it would be helpful I don't think we could do it today I

[2:41:56] Voice 4: think it would require some work with applicants for this but whether or not it would be helpful

[2:42:02] Voice 4: for for us as an LTC to send a letter with staff's input and advice to the STRD just

[2:42:11] Voice 4: telling them how we see these buildings that are coming in for some stress from the STRD that we

[2:42:20] Voice 4: don't see them as accessories but under our rules these are just dwellings and I don't know how far

[2:42:29] Voice 4: we want to go with that but saying like they're dwellings and if they're correctly cited we say

[2:42:33] Voice 4: say that you know that doesn't that's just helping them understand where we're from i mean i'm not

[2:42:40] Voice 4: proposing that i'm throwing that as an idea of discussion

[2:42:43] Voice 11: knowing how different each i'm getting

[2:42:48] Voice 11: a sense of how different each situation is that that could work for one or two and not work not

[2:42:56] Voice 11: work for others um but i would like to have this as part of our protocol meeting with

[2:43:02] Voice 11: with CRD to really clear up where the issue is,

[2:43:06] Voice 11: because my understanding is it's around the fact

[2:43:09] Voice 11: there's no, that number one, for some of these situations,

[2:43:14] Voice 11: there's an application is being approved

[2:43:17] Voice 11: for a certain type of building.

[2:43:19] Voice 11: Like a shop.

[2:43:20] Voice 11: Oh, I see.

[2:43:21] Voice 11: And that now it's being used as a dwelling without,

[2:43:25] Voice 11: and there's no principal, like, is it a principal dwelling

[2:43:29] Voice 11: or is it a shop?

[2:43:32] Voice 11: and okay so the application is saying something different to what the

[2:43:37] Voice 4: original application that

[2:43:38] Voice 4: built this structure so

[2:43:40] Voice 11: those are you know i don't want to go into specifics too much because it's

[2:43:44] Voice 11: it's very clear there's different applications but that is how i so how do we make sure those

[2:43:51] Voice 11: definitions are clear you're right and also what is the process so where does the principle dwell

[2:43:59] Voice 11: and i think if we can say yes you can have a shop without having a principal dwell just can't sleep

[2:44:07] Voice 4: in it but

[2:44:07] Voice 11: then if that's and i think this is common across all bylaws that you can't just

[2:44:13] Voice 11: suddenly make it a principal dwelling right um

[2:44:16] Voice 11: it'd have to go back for process in order to be

[2:44:20] Voice 11: switched if

[2:44:21] Planner (probable): that's does that make sense well yeah they would need to apply for a building permit to

[2:44:26] Planner (probable): convert an accessory building into a dwelling yeah yeah yeah

[2:44:29] Planner (probable): so

[2:44:30] Voice 11: i think that's part of where we're

[2:44:32] Voice 11: we're jostling around all

[2:44:34] Voice 4: right well uh thank you for that i think trustee stanford's uh

[2:44:38] Voice 4: on to so i mean it might be more productive to you know forget about red letters

[2:44:42] Voice 4: to simply have a conversation and a protocol meeting you know to just to talk this out as

[2:44:49] Voice 4: a potential issue that we can say we we find out what the srp's perspective is and they can hear

[2:44:59] Voice 4: from us about you know you know generally how how it works within our regulatory structure

[2:45:07] Voice 4: and perhaps that can help facilitate a resolution of sorts but yeah we're not here to cause trouble

[2:45:17] Voice 4: for people we can alleviate global yeah

[2:45:20] Voice 11: and but it will in order to make sure this is

[2:45:25] Voice 11: good i think by putting it into the ocp process gives people the ability to have input in a more

[2:45:34] Voice 11: general sense and it can help alleviate other potential issues like oh we're looking at

[2:45:41] Voice 11: um housing but in terms of affordability is there something in here that can make

[2:45:47] Voice 11: this situation allow for affordable housing without challenging safety standards and things

[2:45:55] Voice 11: like that. So having that included as part of it.

[2:45:59] Voice 4: I think that makes sense, but I think we can do

[2:46:01] Voice 4: both at the same time.

[2:46:02] Voice 11: No, it's not one or the other.

[2:46:04] Voice 4: One is address the policy issues to

[2:46:09] Voice 14: the

[2:46:10] Voice 4: extent that there are any that emerge from this issue, address them in the OCP since we have the

[2:46:15] Voice 4: opportunity but in the immediate and short term there's the residents who are facing some

[2:46:22] Voice 4: challenging situations and to the extent that we can help both the residents and the ACRD simply

[2:46:29] Voice 4: by creating some clarity as to what the scope of the island's costs involvement can be but also

[2:46:36] Voice 4: what we care about and what we don't care about as all of us can leave

[2:46:41] Voice 4: that might be relevant to the ACRD so we should have that conversation

[2:46:46] Voice 11: so i have a proposed motion but it doesn't have to go here it could go in

[2:46:50] Voice 11: discussion so

[2:46:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): can i jump in like your

[2:46:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): requesting it is being added to the agenda for your next

[2:46:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): protocol meeting which is already in the works from what i understand yes

[2:47:00] Voice 11: so it's going to say

[2:47:01] Voice 11: update

[2:47:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): so we've got a running list of agenda items already from your ocplab review project

[2:47:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): to talk to the fcrd about you want to add this to that yeah agenda we'll need a resolution for that

[2:47:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): this would be a good time to just do it okay

[2:47:15] Voice 14: um

[2:47:16] Voice 11: and then i also have a motion about adding this

[2:47:20] Voice 11: to our ocp project i can do it now

[2:47:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): or i can do it you could probably do that under item 10.1

[2:47:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): so so why don't you do the protocol new motion i move

[2:47:30] Voice 11: that the gambier on the local trust committee

[2:47:34] Voice 11: add the item permitting accessory buildings to our protocol meeting with the Sunshine Coast

[2:47:47] Voice 11: Regional District happening in October 2025.

[2:47:57] Voice 5: Give Lisa a moment. I

[2:48:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): always look at you Patrick I have

[2:48:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): that. Okay thank you. Is there a second? Second by Trustee Bernardo. Any discussion?

[2:48:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): call the vote then all those in favor that carries okay i apologize for jumping all over

[2:48:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): this agenda but it's keeping everyone on their toes so i'm now going back to item 10.1 which

[2:48:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): is the major project for um amber official community plan and

[2:48:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): land use bylaw targeted

[2:48:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): review there's a staff report on page 48 of your agenda package

[2:48:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay, so just to start off, there is recommendation number one in the staff report. I'm asking

[2:48:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we disregard that. Staff read in this report and had a meeting with Squamish Nation

[2:49:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): Rights and Title Department staff last week and determined that in their review of the

[2:49:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): the draft shoreline development permit area,

[2:49:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): their team would like a little bit more time in July.

[2:49:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay.

[2:49:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then in August to get the feedback back to us.

[2:49:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then I can present that in the package

[2:49:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): for your September meeting.

[2:49:19] Voice 14: Okay.

[2:49:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): So a special meeting would actually not advance

[2:49:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): discussion of their input.

[2:49:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): But on that note, I could give you a rough idea

[2:49:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): of where we're headed in terms of their,

[2:49:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): they're really happy to see the draft

[2:49:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): on the shoreline development permit area

[2:49:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): area accepted in the format that it was because it is an example of how to implement their

[2:49:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendations in the actual format of how it would show up in an OCP and in the land use

[2:49:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): justification the area of application they've already indicated that the area of application

[2:49:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): they likely will be increasing making a recommendation for an increased area for

[2:49:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): about for the development permit area was strengthening the development permit area

[2:50:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): area as it's been presented for your consideration what is what was the recommendation 30 meters

[2:50:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): upland and the C word extent was to the extent of the official community planning area

[2:50:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): and part of the rationale for that was that they were concerned that with the Keats example

[2:50:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): development from an area that it was reduced significantly from what their original recommendation

[2:50:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): it might

[2:50:36] Voice 4: well be repeated depending on the feedback between you and how this thing gets

[2:50:42] Voice 4: evolves over time i mean i think we need to be we're on the right hand how many things

[2:50:48] Voice 4: are decided you know at this juncture

[2:50:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): uh so we're looking for uh endorsement in this today's

[2:50:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): meeting of the public engagement topics specifically that you wish to engage with

[2:51:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): the community on over the course of the remainder of this year there's a public engagement work plan

[2:51:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): attached to the staff report for your review and consideration and i'm suggesting that referring

[2:51:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): this to your advisory planning commission is an important step so that they can confirm whether

[2:51:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): or not they are still willing as i had indicated in the beginning that there was an interest in

[2:51:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): participating in the engagement specifically by hosting some of these uh one-off events perhaps

[2:51:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): summer fall it's looking like since it's already quite late in the season um and reporting back to

[2:51:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): the local trust committee on the results of these small group discussion groups but the topic of

[2:51:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): of discussions is the key piece today

[2:51:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we'd like some clarification on

[2:51:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): in terms of what is it specifically

[2:51:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we're engaging on your project charter

[2:51:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): is very targeted in terms of the topics

[2:52:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): for this review of the official community plan

[2:52:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): and the land use bylaw.

[2:52:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): And that was based on the public engagement that was done.

[2:52:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then this project charter was framed

[2:52:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): under the First Nations engagement to confirm their input

[2:52:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): put on those students and then implementation of recommendations coming out of that. So if this is

[2:52:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): opening up those same topics for re-engagement from what was done in 2021

[2:52:29] Voice 7: -2022,

[2:52:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): that's the type

[2:52:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): of direction that I need today so that it's very clear to the community exactly what it is that

[2:52:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): you're asking for feedback on and how that ties back into the input you've already received

[2:52:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): and specifically how that ties to the engagement summary that you received from the nation as well

[2:52:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): which was really clear about um the input related to the topic areas under review so what page is

[2:52:59] Voice 11: that one on again sifting back and forth what page was is what on the four topics i had them

[2:53:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): you're the protection

[2:53:10] Voice 11: of the shoreline which is where public docs i just want to make sure we're

[2:53:15] Voice 11: looking at the same it's on page 53 54.

[2:53:21] Voice 5: because i think i know that i just want to be right okay so

[2:53:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): just i'll check so i'm not skipping anything here uh the other piece to the staff report

[2:53:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): is the annotation of the draft storyline development permit area with the apc comments

[2:53:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): so that's more just for your information that it's captured here it's a reference document moving

[2:53:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): Moving forward, I would be presenting you in September with a similar document that

[2:53:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): shows staff's analysis based on all the input that's received from the Advisory Planning

[2:53:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): Commission and Squamish Nations Commons on an updated revised draft for your consideration

[2:54:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): moving forward as a base example of what the shoreline protection measures might look like

[2:54:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): if you were considering that level of input and analysis into a modified plan so what we

[2:54:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): presented to you as this draft was this first working draft and so if that is the basis of

[2:54:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): what you would like to have as part of the public engagement that can be included however if you're

[2:54:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): deferring to the APC and the nation's input to form part of the first draft bylaw when

[2:54:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): and it does presented to you and then that goes out for community information meeting

[2:54:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): and the regular sort of input after that we could do that as well there's several ways to do this

[2:54:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): i just want to get some clarity on your preferred approach so that we can manage expectations of

[2:54:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): how much is being covered in the engagement at this stage versus once the draft bylaws are

[2:55:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): actually presented because you already have significant input on the preferred approaches

[2:55:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): to some of these options and you just need to know that actual language which is much easier

[2:55:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): for people to comment on and there's just concepts of policies or regulatory option

[2:55:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): however if you have specific ideas today is a good day to sort of sort out what your priorities

[2:55:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): might be because it's yourselves that will be having to interpret that engagement results

[2:55:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): just like with this um squamish first nation engagement summary taking that information

[2:55:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): in and determining how much of this do you direct staff to incorporate into the draft bylaws

[2:55:44] Voice 11: yeah we're i'm just gonna comment that we are kind of in a bit of a catch-22 because we want

[2:55:52] Voice 11: people to have a sense of what the language could look like. At the same time, we don't

[2:55:59] Voice 11: imply this is cut in stone because we're not there yet. And so I'm constantly trying to move

[2:56:06] Voice 11: back and forth. And they are not necessarily easy concepts to understand. And so it's part of the

[2:56:14] Voice 11: discussion I heard earlier where there's a feeling that there hasn't been a lot of engagement with

[2:56:20] Voice 11: the community and part of the reason for that is although there has been a lot of requests for

[2:56:29] Voice 11: engagement sometimes the questions don't resonate and so you don't necessarily get the answers back

[2:56:35] Voice 11: that can translate through an actionable item um so that's i think part of the struggle i've

[2:56:46] Voice 11: been having with this i still think the overall topics are very valid and there are things that

[2:56:53] Voice 11: are constantly being brought up in terms of challenges on the island but that when it comes

[2:57:00] Voice 11: to actual language and there's a real fear in the community that's what it's going to be

[2:57:05] Voice 11: that's the language that's regulations and part of that is it's how we incorporate language from

[2:57:12] Voice 11: the recommendations from Squamish Nation. So it has to be the process of moving through the

[2:57:19] Voice 11: beginning of this engagement, which is what it is. This is the beginning. This is not,

[2:57:24] Voice 11: there's no first draft. This is just how do we engage in these topics. So right now we're

[2:57:33] Voice 11: and so that's how I want to make sure that people are clear. This is the start of engaging

[2:57:41] Voice 11: paging on some of the language. Does this work? Does it not work? And providing alternative

[2:57:50] Voice 11: suggestions, and how does that fit into other recommendations? So that's sort of the types

[2:57:58] Voice 11: of things I'm looking at.

[2:58:02] Voice 4: I have some comments here, I guess. The difficulty here, in part,

[2:58:12] Voice 4: one of the difficulties here is that certainly the planners are incredibly familiar obviously

[2:58:18] Voice 4: that's their expertise with the process um as trustees uh we're nowhere close to having that

[2:58:27] Voice 4: familiarity but we're more familiar with the process and average and then i think we can

[2:58:35] Voice 4: discern from some of the comments we got earlier today and certainly my experience in dealing with

[2:58:40] Voice 4: the community over at kate's with respect to the shoreline bylaws that were developed there

[2:58:49] Voice 4: the process is opaque to the to the community to average people they have great trouble

[2:58:56] Voice 4: understanding even what's going on and somehow we've got to find a way of explaining to the

[2:59:06] Voice 4: public that yes we've got control over the timing of the process but the process itself is mandated

[2:59:14] Voice 4: in legislation and um i think we need to explain what these different stages are in the simplest

[2:59:25] Voice 4: and clearest way we can uh and i i this isn't a challenge it's just unique to us i think it's it's

[2:59:32] Voice 4: a challenge that i think confronts every local trust can be uh in that um there's a certain

[2:59:39] Voice 4: amount of work gets done and everybody has their independent their own individual concerns they see

[2:59:47] Voice 4: the work being done and they you know to be blunt they you know they ask that it be slowed down or

[2:59:54] Voice 4: whatever because they don't really understand it but they do have a sense that the ship has kind of

[3:00:00] Voice 4: already left short when it actually happens and somehow we've got to find a way of uh

[3:00:06] Voice 4: this public engagement process of communicating um the very real distinctions are that are there

[3:00:14] Voice 4: so uh i think one element of that is um the sooner we get language out into the community and this is

[3:00:25] Voice 4: is, and Christy Stamper put it right,

[3:00:27] Voice 4: this double-edged sword, you put the

[3:00:29] Voice 4: language out in the community.

[3:00:31] Voice 4: If you do it the wrong way,

[3:00:33] Voice 4: you're kind of inviting a tornado

[3:00:35] Voice 4: of people, you know, saying, oh, you can't

[3:00:37] Voice 4: do this, it's terrible, even though it's

[3:00:39] Voice 4: a work in progress.

[3:00:41] Voice 4: And other people, you know,

[3:00:43] Voice 4: you don't want people to get overly invested in

[3:00:45] Voice 4: the particular language or the thoughts that

[3:00:47] Voice 4: are in there, because they're in there for discussion.

[3:00:49] Voice 4: But I do

[3:00:51] Voice 4: think we need to get language out into the community

[3:00:53] Voice 4: as soon as possible.

[3:00:54] Voice 4: with the proviso that it has to really be explained that no there is no draft

[3:00:59] Voice 4: of the bylaw yet and uh we haven't gotten to first reading and what we're looking at for

[3:01:07] Voice 4: example with the the draft language uh for the development you know i think we should get it

[3:01:14] Voice 4: out there but we have to be really super clear that um this is draft language uh for proposed

[3:01:22] Voice 4: post-inclusion in what will be a draft by-law

[3:01:28] Voice 4: that will amend the LUB after the OCP amendments

[3:01:33] Voice 4: have come into place.

[3:01:37] Voice 4: So getting the message out that these are out here

[3:01:42] Voice 4: for discussion and people are not to get the idea

[3:01:47] Voice 4: that somehow the cake's already been baked

[3:01:51] Voice 4: because it hasn't been.

[3:01:52] Voice 4: because obviously we're hearing that as a concern and the reason we should be concerned about that

[3:01:58] Voice 4: is like we don't want to be misunderstood we like we want to do a better job and communicate

[3:02:03] Voice 4: again that's not unique to us it's a challenge at every workplace so long-winded way of saying

[3:02:11] Voice 4: is yeah i do think we should uh get that language out there uh and include it in the in public

[3:02:16] Voice 4: engagement that's like in that is proposed in terms of staging those

[3:02:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): my only i i i like

[3:02:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): these papers that are being presented because they they aren't bylaw there

[3:02:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): there's some material here but i think the preamble could be um made a bit more user

[3:02:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): friendly i guess would be the words i would use um because we don't we jump right into you know

[3:02:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): shoreline development permit area like for example being the first sentence to me there

[3:02:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): needs to be some preamble to that what is a development permit now we've got the authority

[3:02:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): there but it's again very legalese i think we need to think of our audience being someone who

[3:03:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): is not familiar with the local government act um and that we just have a bit more preamble to

[3:03:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): so that they understand that development we can't stop what's permitted that the development permit

[3:03:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): permit area is putting some rules onto what's permitted or, you know, finding ways of saying

[3:03:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): it and to describe to the average person and that this document is a discussion document.

[3:03:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): This isn't a bylaw.

[3:03:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's not.

[3:03:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's just so that it's very clear what it is.

[3:03:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): And like I said, just written a bit clearer to the audience.

[3:03:43] Voice 11: Trustee Stamford?

[3:03:44] Voice 11: So one of the things I'm thinking of, and it's something I found very clear when we're looking at the regional district OCP harmonization, is every report that we get puts exactly where we are in the timeline.

[3:04:00] Voice 11: line like it's a linear graph or a visual that shows all the steps and it highlights this is

[3:04:09] Voice 11: where we are now and it shows up in every single report that we can then just point to and go these

[3:04:16] Voice 11: are the steps that have been done these are the steps still to go to demonstrate that we really

[3:04:22] Voice 11: we are still despite 10 years uh still at the at the first part and i don't have a problem with it

[3:04:32] Voice 11: taking a long time as long as what we're doing isn't isn't so slow that the issues change and

[3:04:41] Voice 11: then we keep having to go right back to the beginning again um because we still have to

[3:04:46] Voice 11: update this official community plan so I do want it to keep going I don't have a need for it to

[3:04:54] Voice 11: speed along and I still think the the topics that we're looking at are relevant in the big picture

[3:05:02] Voice 11: and then in addition as I'm hearing new topics come up I think that's part of the engagement

[3:05:11] Voice 11: Having that ability to say, OK, this is becoming an issue. Does it fit within any of these larger topics or can we put it aside for a future project down the line?

[3:05:28] Voice 11: And this is why, you know, I'm hearing about housing the first time.

[3:05:33] Voice 11: How does that get incorporated and having that freedom for the APC, for local community groups to have those kind of discussions, knowing that it's not going to get lost.

[3:05:45] Voice 11: So those are the kind of things that I'm looking at.

[3:05:48] Voice 11: But in terms of looking at the four topics, I still think they're important.

[3:05:53] Voice 11: and I would like to change the charter to allow for the discussion around how to make

[3:06:01] Voice 11: our bylaws around accessory housing and dwellings more clear and more flexible so

[3:06:10] Voice 11: am I making any sense whatsoever yeah

[3:06:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): so I would suggest then clarifying how you'd like to amend

[3:06:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): the project character and being really clear what the scope of that particular review looked like

[3:06:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): because we haven't discussed that in

[3:06:28] Voice 1: any way shape

[3:06:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): or form formally there's been no staff analysis

[3:06:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the issues you've had information presented from the planners based on reacting to

[3:06:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): you know very current situation and that's not documented that's not been provided in any kind

[3:06:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): of comprehensive package two um let alone identifying the scope of potential changes

[3:06:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): to address it right so another the official

[3:06:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): community plan there's very limited scope it's

[3:06:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): all mostly land use by law related like does the definition of a dwelling on gambier island

[3:07:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): need to be amended and there's that type of analysis hasn't been done to demonstrate to you

[3:07:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): is the range of potential options yeah because

[3:07:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): the ocp is simply policy direction that informed

[3:07:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): the land use by law which is where all the regulations are and that could be the better

[3:07:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): place yeah we were never intending to present you with an ocp and then sit back and wait

[3:07:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we would be presenting both to you to say based on the engagement and information you see

[3:07:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): this is how the ocp might need to look and this is what the land use by law to implement it looks

[3:07:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): like that way the community sees ah this policy directive translates into this regulation didn't

[3:07:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): expect that not loving this yeah that's what always policy sounded great on its own yeah until

[3:07:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): you see what it looks like when it's a regulation and then it hits home oh this changes the way i

[3:07:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): use or enjoy or develop a piece of property so then you get different types of input same with

[3:07:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): swamish nation they're interested in seeing both documents presented back for referral to them so

[3:08:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): so they can see how the policy directive translated

[3:08:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): into actionable regulations or guidelines

[3:08:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): to guide settlement and development patterns

[3:08:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): in a way that protects their interests.

[3:08:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): So having said that the project charter

[3:08:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): is the first piece then I would encourage a resolution

[3:08:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): that provides clear direction to staff

[3:08:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): on not just expanding that,

[3:08:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): but provide what level of information do you want

[3:08:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): presented that for september on that piece it seems or just in terms of how you want that to be

[3:08:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): engaged uh with the community the summer and fall before september because the clock is still

[3:08:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): running i appreciate that you're not concerned about the timelines but as the project manager

[3:08:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): for this project i do need to have an accountability piece to your fiscal budget

[3:08:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): right in terms of using these funds if you are intending to engage your community

[3:09:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): you know from August to October this year for example where there's targeted topics

[3:09:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): how can we include that into it at the same time with clarity about what it is that we're asking

[3:09:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): because we need to provide the context of the issue for those who don't understand the issue

[3:09:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): and aren't directly involved yet and then provide the options so if you haven't seen that that's

[3:09:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): difficult for me to do and present to the public because that would be something that typically you

[3:09:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): You would have a full understanding of it before we take it to the community for engagement.

[3:09:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): So I can definitely do that for you for September.

[3:09:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then that forms the basis of the information package that the community would then have access to, to acquaint themselves with the issue and then be aware that this is going to be part of the engagement that's rolling out for them in the fall and winter.

[3:09:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): or the other option is you could refer this to the advisory planning commission

[3:09:58] Voice 7: for

[3:09:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): the summer is that this particular issue i work with them to lay out the context of what

[3:10:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): the referral is and that you're seeking input from the advisory planning commission on how this issue

[3:10:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): could be better addressed and then that forms the basis of public engagement in the fall and winter

[3:10:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's so many ways to approach this without muddying the waters but

[3:10:19] Voice 11: i feel like it's pretty

[3:10:20] Voice 11: money for me I've got too many choices and I don't think patients are in terms of adding anything new

[3:10:27] Voice 11: to the OCP charter um because I do think it's quite specific and um trying to encompass it

[3:10:40] Voice 11: in the same way as the other topics have already had a certain level of description added to the

[3:10:46] Voice 11: reports background um i don't see this quite at the same level so i'm not sure how to um

[3:10:55] Voice 11: add it in but i don't want it to get lost um so any ideas uh

[3:11:04] Voice 4: other than simply just

[3:11:06] Voice 4: having a resolution to put it in the charter and

[3:11:09] Voice 11: see what happens yeah

[3:11:10] Voice 4: i mean but i i also think

[3:11:14] Voice 4: think it would be probably not a great idea to try to wing it today that's

[3:11:20] Voice 11: what I'm concerned

[3:11:20] Voice 11: about

[3:11:20] Voice 4: perhaps I

[3:11:21] Voice 11: mean uh

[3:11:22] Voice 4: it's well I don't know how the timing works but uh especially since we've got

[3:11:28] Voice 4: this the time economy the engagement plan but realistically we're a long ways away from having

[3:11:36] Voice 4: a comprehensive OCP and LWB language so it

[3:11:40] Voice 4: seems to me we could probably seems to me it'd be very

[3:11:45] Voice 4: uh convenient for you to work with staff in between now and the next meeting to develop

[3:11:51] um

[3:11:51] Voice 4: a resolution to change the project charter to address that issue

[3:11:57] Voice 4: uh and the reason I say work with staff is to sort of develop a focus of what that kind of

[3:12:05] Voice 4: direction would be in the charter like bring it you know focus what the questions are that we want

[3:12:10] Voice 4: to deal with with that accessories issue and then we can pass it at the next meeting and change the

[3:12:15] Voice 4: charter move on you know on that one specific issue yeah

[3:12:19] Voice 11: it's just it is like i'm looking i

[3:12:21] Voice 11: have a possible motion now and um looking at it it's not through a larger ocp question it's more

[3:12:31] Voice 11: or explore the possibility of permitting accessory buildings

[3:12:36] Voice 11: prior to the establishment of principal dwelling

[3:12:38] Voice 11: is pretty specific.

[3:12:40] Voice 3: Oh, in your hands.

[3:12:42] Voice 5: So

[3:12:42] Voice 11: I'm not sure how that fits into this larger project.

[3:12:47] Voice 11: So go ahead.

[3:12:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): How it fits is there's a tension being drawn to it at the moment.

[3:12:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): So that's the challenge is when you're having your engagement,

[3:12:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): there are emerging things.

[3:12:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I think it's being aware of that.

[3:13:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): you either say not now or you're making space now while you're having this engagement to explore

[3:13:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): truly understand what is the need and

[3:13:11] Voice 11: and when we being able to have engagement sessions with

[3:13:18] Voice 11: local people recognizing how difficult it is for us to connect with islanders across Gambier

[3:13:27] Voice 11: that it is so challenging compared to

[3:13:30] Voice 11: that I don't want to lose the opportunity

[3:13:35] Voice 11: of finding out what other issues there are by being really

[3:13:39] Voice 11: specific about, oh, we can only talk about forestry, we can only talk

[3:13:44] Voice 11: about DPAs. I would rather allow for a certain limited

[3:13:48] Voice 11: time in each engagement session to say, okay, what else is coming up?

[3:13:52] Voice 11: Because there might be themes that are emerging. We

[3:13:56] Voice 5: We

[3:13:56] Voice 11: just created these topics five years ago.

[3:14:01] Voice 11: There's bound to be new stuff happening.

[3:14:04] Voice 11: So I think that's part of the challenge of having such a slow rollout,

[3:14:11] Voice 11: which I totally understand.

[3:14:12] Voice 11: This is just what happened.

[3:14:16] Voice 11: So I think how I'd like to address it is not move this specific OCP request

[3:14:22] Voice 11: request right now but to add it in is a particular thing to it has to set aside until we can

[3:14:33] Voice 11: clearly understand how the four bigger topics um but i don't want to lose this and i want to

[3:14:41] Voice 11: keep moving forward so i just

[3:14:44] Voice 11: don't know how to engage the two this is specific the other topics

[3:14:48] Voice 11: are quite big they have language attached to them they have reports but

[3:14:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's more about the design

[3:14:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): of the engagement to allow that space yes within

[3:14:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): the engagement so this is really about when the

[3:15:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): materials are designed in the layout of the plan for how the engagement is going to fall out to

[3:15:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): allow that space for this emerging discussion does

[3:15:15] Voice 7: that make sense

[3:15:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): so what you could do as well or consider is direct staff to bring back a report on this topic

[3:15:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): so that you actually have right for now just you can start i think it's premature to bump it in

[3:15:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): with anything yet until you actually understand the scope of options under your jurisdiction and

[3:15:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): the scope of potential changes that you could consider in coordination with the strd and your

[3:15:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): SCRD meeting yeah so um your SCRD meetings not till October your next LTC meetings in September

[3:15:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): theoretically we can give you a report for September so you're prepared for the October

[3:15:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): meeting with a full understanding of this is the issue and the range of associated issues with this

[3:16:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): we understand our jurisdiction and our responsibility we understand what the SCRD's

[3:16:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): role and options are as well so you're prepared for that meeting to either advocate for changes or

[3:16:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): um present

[3:16:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): some options and then at that point after your protocol meeting you'll have a clearer

[3:16:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): sense of whether or not this needs to roll into part of the possible bylaw amendments that you'd

[3:16:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): like to see considered or whether or not there's any engagement that's necessary that makes sense

[3:16:32] Voice 11: now i'm comfortable so but we don't need to do that in this section we're going to work on the

[3:16:38] Voice 11: ocp and then i can do that motion

[3:16:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): still need a resolution you know because this is like a half

[3:16:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): hours worth of work right requesting staff yeah and then marlis and i'll decide

[3:16:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): to bring back to you so

[3:16:54] Voice 11: i think that i don't want to lose the concerns that have hit the community

[3:16:58] Voice 11: um i also don't want to lose the ability to keep moving forward with the the apc engaging and

[3:17:07] Voice 11: and myself, so people are comfortable

[3:17:11] Voice 11: that we are continuing to reach out

[3:17:14] Voice 11: and want different opinions,

[3:17:16] Voice 11: want different thoughts on what we're trying to do here

[3:17:19] Voice 11: on the three of you.

[3:17:21] Voice 4: So,

[3:17:21] Voice 14: yeah.

[3:17:23] Voice 14: Yeah,

[3:17:23] Voice 4: I'd like to weigh in on Planner Zipanich's proposal,

[3:17:28] Voice 4: sketching out some ideas there.

[3:17:30] Voice 4: I agree with Trustee Stamford.

[3:17:34] Voice 4: That is what's just been laid out

[3:17:36] Voice 4: but a planner is a rational sequence of events, which is before

[3:17:43] Voice 4: we have the concern,

[3:17:46] Voice 4: we want to address it, but how we address it, and frankly,

[3:17:50] Voice 4: whether there's anything we can actually do to address it, they're actually open questions.

[3:17:55] Voice 4: So before we start providing instructions about rolling things into an OCP or developing some program,

[3:18:02] Voice 4: I think the suggestion that we asked for the staff to work out some options and basically define the parameters of the issue to the extent that we have jurisdiction over it is very helpful.

[3:18:19] Voice 4: And it's particularly helpful that that be done in anticipation of when we meet with the SDRD so that we are as prepared as we can be at our end.

[3:18:28] Voice 4: And I think it's only at the conclusion of our discussion to the SCRD that we'll be in a position to have some, you know, sensible thoughts about what to do, if any.

[3:18:42] Voice 4: So thank you for this suggestion. I think it's kind of logical.

[3:18:46] Voice 4: So I would certainly support a resolution to ask staff to do that preliminary assessment of options.

[3:18:54] Voice 4: It might be helpful if the staff would help us with language that is appropriately directed.

[3:19:05] That

[3:19:05] Voice 4: is specific enough that it takes you in the direction that you need in order to...

[3:19:14] Voice 4: Further resolution?

[3:19:15] Voice 4: Yeah.

[3:19:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we can come back to that one in a minute.

[3:19:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): So let's address the OCP ones that we have before us.

[3:19:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): okay

[3:19:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): so uh just bringing bringing your direction to the engagement work plan yeah um i've tentatively

[3:19:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): framed it as august to march 2026 which is the end of the fiscal so assuming that most of the

[3:19:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): public engagement should be wrapped up at that point so the first line of that work plan is that

[3:19:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): there would typically be two community information meetings these are the either digital in person or

[3:19:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): hybrid engagement meetings led by planning staff the first CIM possibly as early as November at

[3:19:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): your regular scheduled meeting to present any APC recommendations and the public engagement

[3:19:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): summary to date on the topic areas and the direction of input that you need to consider

[3:20:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): for drafting bylaws and then the local trust committee at that point would then have some

[3:20:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): level of confidence to say we're ready to see our first draft of the official community plan

[3:20:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): and land use bylaw with the scope of these types of recommendations. We've got the comprehensive

[3:20:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): list of recommendations from Squamish Nation which you've already theoretically given direction to

[3:20:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): see in the draft format plus the public summary and the ABC work. Staff would then go away,

[3:20:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): finalize those drafts of both those documents for presentation in the format of what it looks

[3:20:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): like it's a bylaw present it back to you and if you're comfortable at that point then you're

[3:20:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): looking at a possible second community information meeting uh in march 2026 where those are presented

[3:20:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): to the public right uh for the first time as those drafts to say based on the input on shoreline

[3:20:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): protection and all the input the varied input that you've received here's this here's what you were

[3:21:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): comfortable presenting for consideration of first reading that's frustrating yeah and yeah the public

[3:21:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): the curing happens in the future so those meetings are low cost if they're rolled into your ltc

[3:21:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): meetings if they're standalone meetings uh they're quite expensive of course if they're

[3:21:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): in person in the lower mainland specifically and we

[3:21:23] Voice 11: need to have those options we need to

[3:21:26] Voice 11: record because of the challenges of this particular island this is just one way of doing it usually we

[3:21:33] Voice 11: do it online we can do some of this online but that we have at least one meeting in the evening

[3:21:39] Voice 11: in vancouver um for input i think it's really critical um and that there's there's different

[3:21:47] Voice 11: times different options um i also want to address the ability of the apc to be able to meet

[3:21:56] Voice 11: uh electronically can you speak to that yeah

[3:21:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): i think we were talking before i know it's been

[3:22:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): there's an in that the islands trust is left out of the legislation that lets advisory planning

[3:22:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): committees meet electronically but i know on salt spring we plan on pushing that because we are

[3:22:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): trying to put working folk onto these meetings and then the um consultant themselves is only

[3:22:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): going to be available by soon so we're not going to make everyone come into a room like this and

[3:22:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): and then put the consultant on the Zoom.

[3:22:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's like, let's meet electronically

[3:22:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): and we have to start pushing that envelope.

[3:22:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I think we have to be a bit more aggressive

[3:22:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): from the local press committee standpoint

[3:22:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): and just say, we're doing it.

[3:22:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): We're going to do this

[3:22:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): because I think in your case is a perfect example

[3:22:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): of it.

[3:22:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): You physically cannot come together

[3:22:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): without real big changes.

[3:22:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): changes and your APC wants to be able to work, we need to be able to let them do the work

[3:23:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): and at least, as long as the

[3:23:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): meeting is still made available and open to the public, because

[3:23:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): I know we have some small islands where they manage themselves, the APC do their own minutes

[3:23:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): and so forth.

[3:23:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): How is that so different from meeting virtually as long as it's been made available?

[3:23:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): so i think we just have to straighten that out be a bit more aggressive and okay

[3:23:24] Voice 11: because i i mean i

[3:23:26] Voice 11: really have to acknowledge the level of work our apc did and the challenge for them to find a spot

[3:23:32] Voice 11: where they can meet in person and trying to get that quorum each time was was so stressful it

[3:23:39] Voice 11: kind of took away from the the value of the engagement that they could do so um as long

[3:23:47] Voice 11: long as i know that that can move ahead i think that is very critical um i'm just looking at the

[3:23:53] Voice 11: list here i'm not really sure how to say whether what's good like i i like the idea but i also like

[3:24:00] Voice 11: to be part of um meetings and have opportunities here um and i'm happy to lead those i'm happy to

[3:24:11] Voice 11: work with the apc in developing schedules um i'm still not quite clear on what kind of

[3:24:21] Voice 11: exactly how your direction what i'm missing in your direction um for

[3:24:26] Voice 11: the

[3:24:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement plan yeah

[3:24:29] Voice 11: like it looks good here but you seem to have two different ways we can do it that's part of it

[3:24:35] Voice 11: clearly uh or is it all listed here no

[3:24:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's all listed here as

[3:24:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): the options you know considering

[3:24:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): considering all the APC recommendations, this is what they advised.

[3:24:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): So this is your opportunity to tweak this because you know already

[3:24:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): this is unattainable.

[3:24:52] Voice 11: That's right.

[3:24:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay.

[3:24:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): So I'm being very optimistic saying that by between August and October

[3:24:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): of 2025, there will be a body of engagement summaries,

[3:25:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): collective collated in different ways and presented back to you to give

[3:25:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): a clear direction to staff on bring us the draft official community plan land use by law language

[3:25:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): incorporating everything that we've heard or not incorporating the following so that it's you know

[3:25:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's understood that even though you've received engagement but that you've considered it and you've

[3:25:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): identified what and filtered out clear direction for staff moving forward so the two the top two

[3:25:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): in terms of what people would expect to participate in is those standard community

[3:25:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): information meetings and then these informal community discussion groups which is a unique

[3:25:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): opportunity to geographically address the separation of your island's community groups

[3:25:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): where 10 volunteers and this is where the abc originally said maybe they would be willing to

[3:25:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): each take on um one small informal discussion group but or there's other members members of

[3:26:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the community would be willing to do this and they invite three to ten people they receive a

[3:26:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): small budget of a hundred dollars to support the cost of non-alcoholic drinks or some food

[3:26:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): grocery items so that they can sit down and work through very specific set of questions and then

[3:26:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): anything else that's up for discussion that they deem to be important it would be a catch-all for

[3:26:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): that opportunity so we have the standard questions for the forest protection forest ecosystems

[3:26:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): systems targeted questions for public access to public docs and then targeted questions around

[3:26:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): the shoreline development permit area for example plus open-ended what is missing from the ltc's

[3:26:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): purview right now in this targeted review that needs to be presented back and then we can analyze

[3:26:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): those responses and you can decide how much of that you're willing to incorporate into this

[3:26:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): bylaw phase or that's deferred for another future amendment so that would be the the goal is between

[3:27:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): august and october a bunch of people are taking on this group yeah two hours worth of investment

[3:27:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): in their time and then staff does the coalition and uh okay yeah assembly and it

[3:27:12] Voice 11: doesn't have to

[3:27:13] Voice 11: be apc directed it can be a community correct

[3:27:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): they're just suggesting that you already have

[3:27:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): have appointed members that are interested in possibly participating if we you refer this back

[3:27:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): to the abc to say where do you see yourself involved in this you can get some clear sense of

[3:27:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's no interest so now we really need to go out to the broader community solicit volunteers

[3:27:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): to say who's willing to host this there's a small budget to cover the cost of some incidental food

[3:27:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): or drinks um to be able to do this work and work with my own staff to go through a list of

[3:27:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): pre-vetted questions plus the opportunity to discuss anything under the sun affecting land

[3:27:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): use jurisdiction of the islands just on Gambier Islands not regional issues of parks waste

[3:27:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): management and other those types of things okay so that's what those you know the bulk of the

[3:28:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement would look like and then of course we still have these seven categories where you have

[3:28:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): have a significant influence on your regular email updates to identify opportunities for

[3:28:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): involvement we have very limited impact in my opinion on using social media and our trust

[3:28:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): website however those tools are still there we can still use it it's just based on how many people

[3:28:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): subscribe to those things to get the updates because you're not and we we

[3:28:31] Voice 11: have our local

[3:28:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): social media system so that's not what I can't post so that's right yeah and then and that's

[3:28:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): the fifth category so that could be led by APC members or led by elected officials if you don't

[3:28:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): feel you need any APC input on this then you're you

[3:28:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): know comfortable with it being informal and

[3:28:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): that we just sort of cast a net to see are there 10 potential volunteer hosts who are willing to

[3:28:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): work with staff to coordinate and lead this we can do it that way as well i'd like to start with the

[3:29:04] Voice 11: apc the rents go out from there um okay i'm much clearer with the intent of where we're going with

[3:29:13] Voice 11: this okay right

[3:29:14] Voice 5: i mean um

[3:29:16] Voice 4: kind of challenging to follow various speakers well you know ap

[3:29:24] Voice 4: piece through this that i mean we've been working at the trust of stafford and working a little

[3:29:27] Voice 4: closer with the details and logistics of that sort of thing and including the content of it

[3:29:35] Voice 4: um as i understand the discussion to this point we're talking more about the process of engagement

[3:29:41] Voice 4: than the content with respect to the process i'm quite happy to defer to tristan's work best

[3:29:51] Voice 4: The content of the public engagement is the thing I'm a little bit fixated on, in that

[3:29:58] Voice 4: when we look at the plan.

[3:30:00] Voice 4: uh lots on the process not too much on the content talks about three or five three to

[3:30:06] Voice 4: five targeted questions and uh separate from that um and i'll get back to the challenges

[3:30:15] Voice 4: there except for that um there's already the draft uh language with respect to the dpa that would be

[3:30:24] Voice 4: that might or might not go into the amendments to the OUB.

[3:30:31] Voice 4: There's also on record the recommendations that have come

[3:30:34] Voice 4: from the work that Squamish Nation has done

[3:30:36] Voice 4: in reviewing this, you know, the way forward.

[3:30:41] Voice 4: And I think we can expect the larger community

[3:30:43] Voice 4: to have opinions about that, and that's going to come up.

[3:30:46] Voice 4: And the DPA and the contributions of Squamish Nation,

[3:30:50] Voice 4: those are concrete topics that i'm anticipating that residents will get their hands around because

[3:30:56] Voice 4: they're concrete they they're going to talk about those things and those topics will attract a bit

[3:31:02] Voice 4: of energy and that's fine but they're very limited and they're nowhere close to being

[3:31:08] Voice 4: a complete package so the three to five targeted questions that you're talking about

[3:31:13] Voice 4: are very important and uh if i have any anxiety about there about that is um they can be targeted

[3:31:24] Voice 4: with respect to topic and they probably should be um but it's in the nature of just asking

[3:31:31] Voice 4: questions they tend to be open-ended uh if i have any anxiety is that asking questions

[3:31:38] Voice 4: questions in general as opposed to giving the community something more concrete to work with

[3:31:45] Voice 4: a framework sort of trying to respond to the questions without a framework we don't necessarily

[3:31:51] Voice 4: get responses that provide us with a terrific amount of guidance about what the community

[3:31:56] Voice 4: is thinking uh about the concrete issues because we may not be giving them the concrete issues to

[3:32:06] Voice 4: get their heads around so um targeted questions about the top issues that we anticipate the ocp

[3:32:16] Voice 4: and the oub will deal with because in your professional judgment and in the work that

[3:32:22] Voice 4: you're doing that this is what we need to do to modernize the ocp uh that's fine that's great um

[3:32:30] Voice 4: But I'm hoping that our, I guess it's a question, will we be able to produce a set of, say, plain language discussion documents that establish some parameters or a framework to help residents think about the issues?

[3:32:48] Voice 4: You

[3:32:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): already have them, right? That was already, that was the first phase of the project.

[3:32:53] Voice 4: And have we, have we received, well, have we done anything about getting those out into the general community yet? Or is that strictly the APC level?

[3:33:07] Voice 4: no

[3:33:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): that was done as part of the first phase of your ocp review that was what the public

[3:33:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement work was based on was those discussion papers um so that body of work has already been

[3:33:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): done this project charter that we have now is a result of all that yeah

[3:33:23] Voice 9: so

[3:33:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's not that the

[3:33:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): community hasn't been involved it's that that piece has been concluded and now we've moved on

[3:33:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): and said now these these high priority topic areas that the community has confirmed we went

[3:33:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): to the nation to say under the umbrella of these topic areas what are the recommendations

[3:33:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): and now we've given those to you and now it sounds like we need to go back to the community

[3:33:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): like it's a circular piece yeah but it's

[3:33:51] Voice 11: always i mean we just need to allow for

[3:33:56] Voice 11: reminders because it has been a long time and just say yes they are out there again

[3:34:00] Voice 11: and here they are they're sitting on the website here's the links i can certainly do that

[3:34:06] Voice 14: um

[3:34:07] Voice 11: here's why we're looking at these topics because here's the frame so

[3:34:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): that information

[3:34:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): is documented and so it stands alone in terms of each of those topic areas the questions coming out

[3:34:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): we'd be wanting to work with yourselves offline at least to vet those questions and say here's

[3:34:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): what we're thinking of individually not as an ltc because we can't do that offline but

[3:34:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): individually i'm sure trustee stamford would be willing to vet those questions the apc could be

[3:34:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): used to vet those and refine those questions as well I could work with them if that's what you

[3:34:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): wanted me to do and ensure that it's as accessible as possible either in the printed format digitally

[3:34:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): online so people could just plunk their information online and off it goes when they have these

[3:34:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): discussions and provide their input you know trying to make it as easy for people to you know

[3:34:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): know it's a lot for them to have to research or read those documents go back in time reflect on

[3:35:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): it provide their input but it's up to you because you have to be comfortable with the range of

[3:35:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): policy and regulatory options i'm going to present you with and understand that this is grounded in

[3:35:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): these concerns yep i mean we're not asking people to wordsmith policy and regulations that's my job

[3:35:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's what are the actual concerns that need to be addressed i translate that into policy language

[3:35:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): for you that you then decide good enough to go back to the community right instead of asking

[3:35:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): the community to drop policies and regulations to address an issue that's that's not an efficient

[3:35:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): use of time but you could do it however you think is the easiest way for your community to proceed

[3:35:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): with these i think i think

[3:35:50] Voice 4: the challenge is here is that my failure of understanding is reflective

[3:35:55] Voice 4: of a larger failure of understanding as well you're telling me that the materials are out

[3:36:01] Voice 4: there and gathered through the previous work that's been done that's great and yet we get

[3:36:08] Voice 4: public comments that um there's a certain amount of bewilderment about the process

[3:36:16] Voice 4: That it's going too fast, it's escaping people's grasp in terms of understanding their opportunities to provide input.

[3:36:27] Voice 4: And that's what I'm struggling with. I want to address that.

[3:36:31] Voice 4: So that, so the engagement process, so the residents, after they've participated in the engagement process,

[3:36:42] Voice 4: First of all, we have opportunities to participate that they can access, but when they come away from it, they come away with the sense that they've been hurt, and they engage, and not just that, that when the day comes when they see the draft OCP and LUV amendments, they will see that their concerns were not necessarily always accepted,

[3:37:07] Voice 4: but that that there is some reflection of their contribution and um it's surprising to me to hear

[3:37:19] Voice 4: that you know essentially these discussion documents are already out there communities still

[3:37:26] Voice 4: some of the comments we're hearing suggest that the members of the community don't necessarily

[3:37:31] Voice 4: know or haven't had access to so i'm

[3:37:35] Voice 7: struggling

[3:37:36] Voice 4: a little bit here to find out what's actually been

[3:37:38] Voice 4: going on over the past number of years it's 10 years okay

[3:37:42] Voice 11: so that's part of it is is how this

[3:37:46] Voice 11: process has gone what what i can't like so there's certain level of mechanics that i can participate

[3:37:51] Voice 11: in and that is to send them out again and say here's here's the background here's the here's

[3:37:59] Voice 11: why these three issues were chosen here's their background reports to them and there is opportunity

[3:38:05] Voice 11: opportunity to speak to new issues in these engagement processes but here's why they're

[3:38:11] Voice 11: discussing the way that where they are so it's all on the website but yeah our website is

[3:38:17] Voice 11: well it's on the wheel but it's a story for yeah yeah it's it is what it is

[3:38:23] Voice 11: so that's can certainly come out again and people can agree or disagree with the papers and

[3:38:31] Voice 11: and at least it gives them a foundation of okay why is this being used so you add it up

[3:38:42] Voice 14: right

[3:38:43] Voice 11: so other than the recommendations i think we've gone through the detail of this i really

[3:38:48] Voice 11: would like to move on yeah so

[3:38:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): the first recommendation you can strike strike out

[3:38:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): second recommendation um this is where i'd like some clarity that you want more or less information

[3:39:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): as part of this engagement work plan this is the time to clarify surprises something's been missed

[3:39:10] Voice 11: i

[3:39:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): i'm comfortable

[3:39:12] Voice 11: with i'm reading

[3:39:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): um but you've suggested that you would also like some open-ended

[3:39:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): opportunities or so you want that in there i think that needs to be clear because that's not

[3:39:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): the direction i have under the project charter is to use any time or resources to open up for

[3:39:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): or anything else that might be of interest to people

[3:39:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): to bring back to the LTC.

[3:39:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): So if we'd really like to make sure that's embedded into it,

[3:39:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): we need to tweak recommendation number two,

[3:39:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): so that the public is mostly the expectation

[3:39:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): is that the local trust committee as of June

[3:39:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): wanted to ensure that this summer fall engagement

[3:39:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): included any and all other topics as I thought y'all.

[3:39:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then we can draft those questions accordingly.

[3:39:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): anything.

[3:39:56] Voice 4: I've got a question. The information that you obtained, I'm addressing this to

[3:40:02] Voice 4: Leonard Zipanek, the information that you obtained through the prior public consultation process that

[3:40:11] Voice 4: led to the development of, I guess, underlying discussion papers that worked on the basis for

[3:40:18] Voice 4: the three to five major questions, when was the last

[3:40:23] Voice 4: of that done?

[3:40:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): 2022. So the final consultant's

[3:40:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): report was 2023 i think january that's right through covet yeah it's a snapshot in time is

[3:40:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): what it is

[3:40:38] Voice 4: yeah well that's yeah we're

[3:40:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): not opening up unless you're completely restructuring this

[3:40:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): project and opening up that entire body of work that was not the the intent of you know our

[3:40:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): participation rest

[3:40:50] Voice 4: assured by looking to reinvent the wheel uh but uh because the you know you know

[3:41:00] Voice 4: for the record uh if there are issues that confront the community that require

[3:41:08] Voice 4: you know more thinking about how we do land use planning again

[3:41:12] Voice 4: those issues don't go away uh just because time has gone by um the question really is where the

[3:41:21] Voice 4: community's priorities are which we may or may not acknowledge or maybe we need to acknowledge

[3:41:26] Voice 4: knowledge and we may or may not agree with them but we need to know what they are and

[3:41:31] Voice 4: because i'm hesitating here is no i don't think we should reinvent the wheel but

[3:41:35] Voice 4: the information we obtain from the community is still valid but it is as as you pointed out

[3:41:40] Voice 4: a snapshot of time and what i'm leading up to is i do think that we need to have some room in here

[3:41:49] Voice 4: to solicit uh public input outside of what we believe are the targeted issues the open the

[3:41:58] Voice 4: more i'm shying away from the open-ended thing but

[3:42:02] Voice 11: i mean there

[3:42:03] Voice 4: are boundaries there are boundaries

[3:42:04] Voice 4: to that too but that we need to be open to hearing new things from the community so

[3:42:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): you can you can

[3:42:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): reword recommendation number two just to give that direction and i'll take it and we'll make

[3:42:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): sure that happens okay that's

[3:42:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): what i'm working on right now okay okay

[3:42:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): and then recommendation

[3:42:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): number three is specific to referral to the advisory planning commission to request confirmation

[3:42:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): that its members are willing to support this or be involved but you might also want to direct

[3:42:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): staff to work with them to finalize or develop the engagement questions so that's something you

[3:42:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): could add to amend to recommendation number three and then i'll proactively have the drafts with

[3:42:43] Voice 7: working on

[3:42:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): that do we need to also make a resolution of sort of asserting allowing you

[3:42:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): you know, requesting that the ABC be allowed to work virtually to respond to this material for

[3:42:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): you. I mean, we need to help move

[3:42:57] Planner (probable): that. I can speak to that a little bit. We've been down this

[3:43:00] Planner (probable): road many times when I've presented reports trying to amend meeting procedures. It is not at our

[3:43:08] Planner (probable): level. No, that's what I meant.

[3:43:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): But if we make a resolution, though, we speak to staff, whether

[3:43:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's your level or above your level,

[3:43:16] Voice 19: you know, we can only make resolutions. Well, just that the

[3:43:19] Voice 19: Like the Islands Trust Act doesn't permit it.

[3:43:22] Voice 19: But we can make

[3:43:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): the executive committee

[3:43:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): make a decision on it.

[3:43:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): You know, that we do lots of things

[3:43:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): that our legislation doesn't permit.

[3:43:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): We do it.

[3:43:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Why are we stopping on this one?

[3:43:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): I

[3:43:37] Voice 4: have a question on that front

[3:43:39] Voice 4: with this vaccine APC issue

[3:43:41] Voice 4: to apply to a partner.

[3:43:43] Voice 4: Isn't the Islands Trust Act

[3:43:46] Voice 4: doesn't permit it

[3:43:47] Voice 4: or forbids it?

[3:43:50] Voice 4: or

[3:43:50] Planner (probable): sorry it might have been the community charter i'm trying to recall i haven't written a report

[3:43:55] Planner (probable): because we went

[3:43:56] Voice 4: down the road my recollection of it is that you know there actually isn't any

[3:44:00] Voice 4: wiggle room here that there's one or another piece of legislation is

[3:44:04] Planner (probable): directive yeah correct

[3:44:06] Planner (probable): and david marler is the one that has sort of i

[3:44:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): would rather not speak to it at all it's to me

[3:44:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's through a mission which we have other issues that we have we do we are local government is

[3:44:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): allowed to to hold their apc means or municipal government our down stress wasn't just named in

[3:44:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): the specific yeah to allow that so it's

[3:44:30] Voice 7: it's

[3:44:31] Voice 11: a lot we've got limited time here and i'm really

[3:44:35] Voice 11: worried that we're not going to get yeah no

[3:44:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): mercy i didn't know we wanted to have a resolution

[3:44:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): I would like to just do it.

[3:44:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Good.

[3:44:43] Voice 11: Can't afford it.

[3:44:45] Voice 11: So I'd like to move on recommendation number two,

[3:44:49] Voice 11: that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee endorses the public engagement

[3:44:52] Voice 11: topics and timeline presented in the draft engagement work plan dated June

[3:44:57] Voice 11: 2025 attached to the staff report and that additional opportunities.

[3:45:05] Voice 11: Lisa, are you hearing this?

[3:45:08] Voice 11: That's affirmative, yes.

[3:45:09] Voice 11: for community topics be included in the engagement questions i know

[3:45:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's not great

[3:45:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): i

[3:45:24] Voice 4: have a question that's

[3:45:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): right it's not seconded so i

[3:45:29] Voice 4: i don't um when i see the recommendations we

[3:45:32] Voice 4: have a request that we uh endorse the public engagement topics the timeline is this res um

[3:45:41] Voice 4: this is a i'm having trouble following the resolution is this resolution just narrowly

[3:45:45] Voice 4: to amend the work plan item two

[3:45:49] Voice 11: i'm just adjusting that number two and adding to it

[3:45:53] Voice 4: okay it's not

[3:45:56] Voice 4: cute that's fine it's not clean

[3:45:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's ugly but

[3:45:59] Voice 4: well i'm sure the plan doesn't get the meaning of

[3:46:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): lisa did you get that yes

[3:46:06] Voice 22: i did chair patrick would you like me to read it back

[3:46:08] Voice 14: sure sure okay

[3:46:10] Voice 22: but the gambier island local trust committee endorses the public engagement

[3:46:14] Voice 22: topics and timeline presented in the draft public engagement work plan dated June 2025

[3:46:20] Voice 22: attached to the staff report and that additional opportunities for community topics be included

[3:46:27] Voice 22: in the engagement questions that

[3:46:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): sound reasonable does that make sense

[3:46:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): I understand what you're

[3:46:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): asking for and we will proceed with that right is

[3:46:37] Voice 4: there a second I have a question

[3:46:39] Voice 4: uh as i understand it's for the planner as i understand the resolution it will do two things

[3:46:48] Voice 4: it's going to amend amend item two of the plan but it is actually just different language that

[3:46:55] Voice 4: it's going to have the effect of adopting the whole uh public engagement plan so it's a substitute

[3:47:02] Voice 4: for what we have of the second staff recommendation that's

[3:47:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): the whole thing the

[3:47:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): whole thing with an

[3:47:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): addition right okay

[3:47:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): so i will be yeah just slightly modifying the work plan language like

[3:47:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): that yes all right so a second to that motion second by trustee bernardo any discussion

[3:47:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): i'll call the vote all those in favor that carries

[3:47:27] and

[3:47:28] Voice 11: then you needed the third one i'm new at the gambier on local trust committee request staff to

[3:47:33] Voice 11: refer public engagement work plan to the advisory planning commission and request confirmation that

[3:47:38] Voice 11: as members will be available and willing to support targeted implementation or facilitation

[3:47:42] Voice 11: of up to 10 community discussion groups between august and october 2025. seconded by trustee

[3:47:51] Voice 11: bernardo any discussion it's up to

[3:47:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): and did you want

[3:47:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): to add anything about uh referring

[3:47:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): draft questions engagement questions to the agency

[3:48:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): isn't it

[3:48:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): yeah it refers to the abc that's what it says okay well i'll just add that in yeah oh good

[3:48:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right is there any further discussion all about all those in favor

[3:48:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): that

[3:48:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): carries thank you i

[3:48:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): have a third recommendation then so the gambier island

[3:48:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): which is committee request staff to bring back our report to the september 9th 2025 ltc meeting

[3:48:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): that includes a preliminary assessment of options regarding accessory building regulations and the

[3:48:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): range of associated issues discussed the june 24th 2025 ltc meeting that this report defines

[3:48:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): the parameters of the issues and considers jurisdictional responsibilities of the ltc

[3:48:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): I hope you sent that to Lisa I'm

[3:48:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): just about to she's going to send that to you Lisa and I

[3:48:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): moved that one she

[3:49:00] Voice 4: just said trustee Stanford just said

[3:49:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustee Stanford is moving the motion

[3:49:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): right out sent to Lisa is there a second to that motion second by trustee Bernardo

[3:49:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): any discussion can you talk me with that one all those in favor that carries any other business on

[3:49:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): on the OCP, no, okay, thank you so much, thank you, so we're going to keep moving on here, now

[3:49:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): moves faster folks, yes, we are big medians, so we have one piece of correspondence here from the

[3:49:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): House Sound Biosphere, this

[3:49:37] Voice 11: is a big one, yeah, it could be a big one, but I think I would like to,

[3:49:44] Voice 11: And it's important because the 30 by 30 is definitely a wooden cause.

[3:49:49] Voice 11: It fits within our mandate.

[3:49:51] Voice 11: We are the beating heart of the House Sound Biosphere Initiative.

[3:49:58] Voice 11: They are going to present in a couple of days to the SCRD board.

[3:50:04] Voice 11: And I'm hoping to have some recommendations come out of that.

[3:50:08] Voice 11: I know that there's some timing issues around it.

[3:50:11] Voice 11: But, you know, I think if we're going to make any adjustments, again, it's rezoning-type opportunities that they're asking for.

[3:50:22] Voice 11: They seem quite minor, but at this point, I'd rather have it come through the regional district.

[3:50:29] Voice 11: And I've added it to the list for discussion at the regional district.

[3:50:34] Voice 11: So,

[3:50:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's received for information right now, but stand by, it may come back.

[3:50:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[3:50:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): Does that sound okay?

[3:50:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[3:50:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): hello steve bernardo a

[3:50:43] Voice 4: question about clarification the letter from the advisor folks

[3:50:49] Voice 4: their intent in bringing it to our attention appears to be that they want to somehow

[3:50:54] Voice 4: facilitate communications between themselves and our planning staff to help inform their request do

[3:51:00] Voice 4: we um do we have opinions about that element of it and if so uh and we want to enable it we need to

[3:51:11] Voice 5: make

[3:51:11] Voice 4: a resolution to that effect

[3:51:13] Voice 4: and urging our staff to

[3:51:15] Voice 4: communicate

[3:51:15] Voice 4: with the device

[3:51:18] Voice 4: people or what do we want to do

[3:51:21] Voice 4: about what appears to be

[3:51:22] Voice 4: an intent to sort of

[3:51:25] Voice 4: work with our staff

[3:51:26] Voice 4: so

[3:51:27] Voice 11: what I'm thinking

[3:51:28] Voice 11: is because this is actually

[3:51:31] Voice 11: addressed to the SCRD

[3:51:33] Voice 11: I think

[3:51:33] Voice 5: that

[3:51:34] Voice 11: it comes through the SCRD to

[3:51:36] Voice 11: us because

[3:51:38] Voice 11: they're going to have

[3:51:41] Voice 11: certain parameters that this impacts and how that how our staff can make amends or support this

[3:51:50] Voice 11: initiative depends on what some of the responses from the srd staff okay so

[3:51:56] Voice 11: i'd rather do it the

[3:51:57] Voice 11: other way around and then it's

[3:51:58] Voice 11: clear and then we won't be able to do anything about this right off

[3:52:02] Voice 11: the bat and yet it's really a good cause

[3:52:06] Voice 4: so to the extent there's going to be any communication

[3:52:08] Voice 4: back and forth with our staff that's just going on the shelf for now

[3:52:11] Voice 11: it'll be it'll come back

[3:52:14] Voice 11: at some probably september i'll make a request and also it'll be coming up at a joint meeting

[3:52:20] Voice 11: all

[3:52:21] Voice 4: right all right

[3:52:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): yeah okay fire up we already dealt with the section 12 on to section 13 staff

[3:52:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): reports and the highlights from the trust conservancy board meetings i go ahead i would

[3:52:37] Voice 11: just like to crow a little bit yeah that the islands trust conservancy received a gift of

[3:52:43] Voice 11: 1.14 million and that is very much due to our strategic plan giving which i champion very

[3:52:55] Voice 11: hardly and i

[3:52:59] Voice 3: can get credit i

[3:53:01] Voice 11: can i need credit i weren't part of that one and thank you that was

[3:53:05] Voice 11: That's awesome.

[3:53:06] Voice 11: Okay, next one.

[3:53:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, we have the applications report here on page 96.

[3:53:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any questions on applications?

[3:53:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have the trustee local expense report here as well

[3:53:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): for your information.

[3:53:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): And the adopted policies and standing resolutions.

[3:53:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): Nope, that's good.

[3:53:29] Voice 5: Got rid of two of them.

[3:53:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[3:53:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): And the other items we don't have any information on, like the nuns next to these things, but that's what it says.

[3:53:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, the work program on 14.1 on page 105 of the agenda package is the work program.

[3:53:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think the work is being focused on a few places, so no changes on that.

[3:53:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): Future project list, not liking the name of future

[3:53:57] Voice 11: project, parking lot, go ahead.

[3:53:59] Voice 11: Okay, for a minor project, where are we with the Keats Island Shoreline Protection Project?

[3:54:07] Voice 11: I just want to make sure, like, at what point are we?

[3:54:09] Voice 11: Because when I look at our project on the webpage, it's from 2023.

[3:54:16] Voice 11: We haven't had any updates on our webpage.

[3:54:20] Voice 11: So the bylaws are with the minister.

[3:54:22] Voice 11: They have not had any updates.

[3:54:23] Voice 11: So that's, I just want to state that.

[3:54:28] Voice 4: i'm glad you raised it i'm glad trustee stanford raised the topic because i've received quite a

[3:54:34] Voice 4: few inquiries from people wanting to know you know are the bylaws in force no when are they

[3:54:39] Voice 4: coming for us i can't say i don't know they're with the minister uh how long have they been

[3:54:45] Voice 4: with the minister and do we have any indication of when they might be returned with some kind of

[3:54:53] Voice 4: decision to take since

[3:54:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): january and no we don't have any sense when we send bylaws to the minister's

[3:54:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): office the staff are unable to give us any timeline it's all based on triaging and topic

[3:55:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): areas and whether or not there's issues in post nations that they need to reconcile or sort out

[3:55:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): before they get back to us they haven't asked us for more information so we don't even know if

[3:55:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): they're missing any information at this point in time

[3:55:14] Voice 4: what's if it's possible to say what's the

[3:55:17] Voice 4: the typical turnaround time

[3:55:20] Voice 4: on a bylaw?

[3:55:22] Voice 4: Three to eight months.

[3:55:23] Voice 4: Okay.

[3:55:28] Voice 4: We're getting

[3:55:29] Voice 4: close to the eight-month mark.

[3:55:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right. Well, moving on, then our next

[3:55:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): meeting is going to be September 9th.

[3:55:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's going to be electronic.

[3:55:39] Voice 4: Well, I think we

[3:55:40] Voice 4: have to resolve that.

[3:55:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah, we have to make a month. Oh, that's right.

[3:55:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): The next one there is that

[3:55:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): we need to, it was going

[3:55:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): to be in person so we do need to pass a motion oh that's the motion i started to read so that

[3:55:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): that's what we have that 15.1 we need to make that motion like one of you do that yes

[3:56:02] Voice 4: i moved it began your local trust committee um i request staff to change the september 9 2025

[3:56:10] Voice 4: 10 a.m meeting from in person to electronic is

[3:56:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): there a second second by trustee stamford

[3:56:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): heard any discussion all the vote all those in favor that carries so then our next meeting will

[3:56:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): be electronic on september 9th we're going to be going into a closed meeting um this time and

[3:56:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): really want to wait but the public comments were after so did we do a public comment before the

[3:56:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): closed meeting i think it would be better yes so that

[3:56:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): people can just leave as i didn't catch that

[3:56:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): yes so um sorry uh we did the this one has a second public comment we do not rework decisions

[3:56:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): that we just discussed but there is a second public comment period on here is there anyone

[3:56:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): that wishes to address us a second time so i just

[3:56:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): well i just want

[3:56:59] Voice 11: to clarify that the idea for the

[3:57:01] Voice 11: second uh public uh comment period was a little less formal so it's difficult because we've all

[3:57:10] Voice 11: got timing issues but I wanted to give people an opportunity to ask questions a little bit more

[3:57:16] Voice 11: free flow especially when we've got planners and panics here who may be able to respond in a bit

[3:57:23] Voice 11: more of a back and forth as we've we've made a number of decisions today the implications aren't

[3:57:29] Voice 11: necessarily clear and I wondered if and that there's any other sort of observations that

[3:57:37] Voice 11: going through this process because this was a complicated meeting um or any updates as to

[3:57:44] Voice 11: what was being talked about earlier the decisions we made based on some of those

[3:57:50] Voice 11: comments from the earlier public meeting so that was the intent of this second public meeting but

[3:57:55] Voice 11: if we keep it to um a specific time there's a lot of people here so if we keep it to half an hour

[3:58:04] Voice 11: does that help are you okay getting home i have no idea how i'm getting home so don't ask me a

[3:58:10] Voice 11: question i hope to get there tonight um so so let's just see how it goes um i don't know if

[3:58:19] Voice 11: anybody's left because i mean that wasn't long that was a slog but if anyone would like to speak

[3:58:26] Voice 11: to some of the issues that have come up since the earlier public meeting.

[3:58:33] Voice 11: How's that going?

[3:58:34] Voice 11: We can

[3:58:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): be a little informal here.

[3:58:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): We are broadcasting.

[3:58:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): We are still live streaming.

[3:58:40] Voice 12: It is still a meeting.

[3:58:42] Voice 12: Any questions?

[3:58:45] Voice 12: I miss much of that meeting, so I'll just have to read it to catch up.

[3:58:48] Voice 12: All right.

[3:58:49] Voice 12: Anyone else?

[3:58:50] Voice 12: I just have comments.

[3:58:52] Voice 20: Okay.

[3:58:52] Voice 20: Okay.

[3:58:53] Voice 20: Yeah.

[3:58:53] Voice 20: because of the the whole accessory building situation um it can sort of get confusing um

[3:59:03] Voice 20: and i you know just i was able to reach up to the emily office and voice concerns not just for me

[3:59:11] Voice 20: but gathering from the community from from this letter that was received and the enforcement and

[3:59:19] Voice 20: And it just felt very malicious in a way.

[3:59:24] Voice 20: And so it's kind of like you need a time to kind of get back to our sorts of understanding where's the common ground here for us to address to its trust.

[3:59:39] Voice 20: and just knowing that we don't have the infrastructure in place to support such huge developments and dwellings

[3:59:51] Voice 20: and abiding by BC building codes and things like that, it's that the accessory building has come up.

[4:00:00] Voice 20: because people are living in a smaller footprint of a space,

[4:00:07] Voice 20: three, four hundred square feet, whether we call it tiny home.

[4:00:11] Voice 20: Tiny home is not in the BC Building Code, unfortunately.

[4:00:16] Voice 20: And to be able to live affordable housing in that manner

[4:00:21] Voice 20: and knowing that it already takes long enough for us to get building materials here

[4:00:29] Voice 20: and knowing that what we already have is resource on the island to provide certain

[4:00:35] Voice 20: building materials for people to construct their own dwelling I certainly wouldn't construct my

[4:00:41] Voice 20: own dwelling I have no clue so I would hire somebody of course but people have done that

[4:00:48] Voice 20: over 30 40 50 years and now having to conform living in 400 square feet to a step three

[4:00:59] Voice 20: building code and now pouring out more money just to comply because of a complaint against

[4:01:07] Voice 20: my property for instance and the other properties during this last four weeks

[4:01:14] Voice 20: it's just concerning to know that our islands trust land use bylaw to look at amending it to

[4:01:22] Voice 20: talk about um not having to conform to such high standards building code for instance and i

[4:01:30] Voice 20: understand it might be a crd thing but when i was speaking to the chief building official with scrd

[4:01:37] Voice 20: last month regarding this situation is that if islands trust allows for an amendment

[4:01:44] Voice 20: in their land use bylaw um to let people live in their accessory building is is the discussion we

[4:01:51] Voice 20: had on the forum is that they would remove themselves from a situation of an infraction

[4:01:58] Voice 20: of such. So that's sort of like I'm hoping that there can be some gathering around understanding

[4:02:06] Voice 20: the dwelling component in the Islands Trust, what that is and then how the step three code

[4:02:17] Voice 20: um hopefully doesn't have to impact everyone who wants to live in a smaller space and

[4:02:24] Voice 20: may not need a heat pump or something to that effect which is like part of this new step three

[4:02:29] Voice 20: air exchange and all this stuff it's just it's a lot um so and moving out of the city was

[4:02:37] Voice 20: the reason coming here to a little area to live in in a smaller footprint but not having to deal

[4:02:44] Voice 20: with um certain certain codes and things like that yeah

[4:02:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): regional district so hopefully that makes

[4:02:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): sense what so we have asked staff to pull together a report which will be sort of our side of

[4:03:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): understanding and then we are working toward a protocol meeting with the regional district so

[4:03:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): that we'll be well informed over the regional district and then have joint conversation

[4:03:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): conversation essentially

[4:03:11] Voice 7: on

[4:03:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): clarifying that's sort of

[4:03:15] Voice 11: where we are. I think we're trying to

[4:03:18] Voice 11: work towards that but I was wondering if you could add any more to that.

[4:03:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yeah I just wanted to

[4:03:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): reiterate the need for this report and the analysis of some of these topics that you're

[4:03:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): bringing up to be presented to the LTC. I think it would be an interesting document for yourself

[4:03:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): and everyone

[4:03:36] Voice 5: because

[4:03:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): we can actually clarify just because the chief building officer thinks

[4:03:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): that the island's just has the jurisdiction to change the definition dwelling um we're going

[4:03:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): to look at the island's just act of course in our authority and confirm or deny that we can just

[4:03:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): arbitrarily recommend a definition change of dwelling and suddenly have this flexibility

[4:03:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): and option right so that's the kind of information that's going to be coming in the fall yeah that

[4:04:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): will either confirm this is the scope of potential change of influence or it's actually there's a lot

[4:04:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah

[4:04:09] Voice 20: i mean we don't have like our municipality on danver island is it all under scrd for

[4:04:15] Voice 20: everything across the board um and that's sort of like it's a great area like if it's just

[4:04:21] Voice 20: requiring a building permit through scrd we're not getting

[4:04:24] Voice 20: any other services here we don't

[4:04:25] Voice 20: have garbage and recycling removal i wish we did um but why we're enforced on building um

[4:04:33] Voice 20: a structurally sound and I will say that building to live in and now having this target on you it's

[4:04:42] Voice 20: it's it's not a nice feeling at all and to recognize the resources we already have on the

[4:04:49] Voice 20: island the lack of infrastructure and the other islands that don't require the bylaw enforcement

[4:04:57] Voice 20: enforcement is it is a it is owner responsibility um and every owner should through the through the

[4:05:05] Voice 20: island's trust land use citing regulations that form the addendum it strictly says on the permit

[4:05:12] Voice 20: document there but it it

[4:05:16] Voice 11: is yeah separate and they do they will require if somebody did make

[4:05:23] Voice 11: you could complain right you'd still have to go through the same process but to a different

[4:05:27] Voice 11: authority yeah

[4:05:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): the citing and use permit yeah citing and use permits it's in the

[4:05:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): absence of

[4:05:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): uh there's no building inspection service extended to denman and harvey island

[4:05:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): from the regional

[4:05:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): district yeah they're going to be discussing that at their next protocol meeting as to like

[4:05:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's time right denman and harvey might also need to be considered under the building inspection

[4:05:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): purview of the north valley regional district and so that's a big discussion for them is that

[4:05:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): that includes excluding yourself from the Sunshine Coast Regional District's

[4:05:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): building service provision is also a discussion point

[4:05:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): that will probably be brought up in the staff report.

[4:06:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): If that's an option, here's what the implications of that is.

[4:06:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): In terms of sustainable housing stock

[4:06:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): and making sure that the built environment has longevity to it,

[4:06:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): not just affordability, sustainability in the long term.

[4:06:14] Voice 12: These

[4:06:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): are safeguards, especially in the terrain that you're dealing with here.

[4:06:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): It's not flat.

[4:06:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): right and so there's a number of benefits to people when they're purchasing a home to know

[4:06:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): that it's been permitted and constructed to a standard that's high because this isn't

[4:06:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): the easiest to

[4:06:30] Voice 20: pornography now fair enough

[4:06:31] Voice 20: and and as a real estate agent i'll put it up there

[4:06:34] Voice 20: is that there are buyers that do their their proper whole inspections and have a proper

[4:06:38] Voice 20: inspector come and assess all that before they buy the property

[4:06:42] Voice 20: so um

[4:06:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah the other piece that

[4:06:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): And I think the report will comment on its equivalencies and the ability for building inspectors to apply equivalencies in certain areas in rural communities.

[4:06:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): And we know that that does get extended and does exist, but we're not sure what the issue is with the SRED in terms of how much flexibility is there here.

[4:07:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): Is this a higher risk island categorized under their own system that excludes that option for equivalencies?

[4:07:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): Or is that just something that needs to be explored and advocated for by your elected officials?

[4:07:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): and there comes an agreement where they're able to share something, so that report should

[4:07:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): hopefully answer a lot of these questions and give them a scope of how to discuss next

[4:07:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): steps and what's worth pursuing and what isn't on the table for discussion.

[4:07:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yeah,

[4:07:30] Voice 20: I would certainly think fire safety is important when building a house versus

[4:07:35] Voice 20: energy efficiency, if you're living in a smaller space, it's environmentally run, you already

[4:07:44] Voice 20: Yeah, I,

[4:07:48] Voice 4: you know, we talked a lot about this topic, we had to make the observation that we have your point.

[4:07:57] Voice 20: Yeah.

[4:07:58] Voice 4: And what you presented us with is a question for us to consider and to discuss with the folks or the SCRT.

[4:08:09] Voice 4: To do that, we have to be better informed than we already are.

[4:08:12] Voice 4: That's what Planner Zipanets is going to do for us.

[4:08:17] Voice 4: The way I see the question at this point, without anticipating what the Planner is going to tell us, is

[4:08:23] Voice 4: there's a question here about the proportionality of how the SCRD is applying the existing building bill

[4:08:30] Voice 4: as to whether some of these requirements could be safely varied for Gangren

[4:08:38] Voice 4: without adversely affecting the policy objectives of any of them.

[4:08:46] Voice 4: For example, things that are in building code to encourage energy efficiency,

[4:08:52] Voice 4: dealing with the houses, 500 square feet or less,

[4:08:55] Voice 4: they're going to be irrelevant, frankly.

[4:08:57] Voice 4: And even if they were irrelevant,

[4:08:59] Voice 4: how many houses are you really talking about?

[4:09:02] Voice 4: I'm saying that in a very simplistic way through the planners

[4:09:06] Voice 4: and to join it all.

[4:09:07] Voice 4: but

[4:09:07] Voice 5: that's

[4:09:08] Voice 4: why we need to get the report from from the planner and then we're going to be able to and

[4:09:13] Voice 4: we will but you and others have raised an issue that legitimately we can bring up with the ICRD

[4:09:22] Voice 4: talk about and we'll see where we go with it.

[4:09:27] Voice 11: And from a larger perspective this is not just

[4:09:30] Voice 11: an island problem i've heard the issues around trying to reach that step three is extremely

[4:09:37] Voice 11: expensive anywhere so imagine how much more expensive it is on an island but everyone is

[4:09:44] Voice 11: being challenged by that that new standard and so part of what i can do through the regional

[4:09:51] Voice 11: district is also advocate to the province and say this you you want housing and yet we've got

[4:09:58] Voice 11: these standards is there things that we can do to mitigate the requested step three and recognize

[4:10:06] Voice 11: that houses under 1200 square feet for instance are much more efficient just by their size can

[4:10:12] Voice 11: we do something different right and

[4:10:14] Voice 11: so those kind of provincial advocate advocacy type things are

[4:10:19] Voice 11: things that we can also do because we're all challenged by this and i've talked to several

[4:10:24] Voice 11: lot of people in the mainland we just can't build it you know it is an issue right now so yeah

[4:10:30] Voice 7: is

[4:10:32] Voice 4: there any other points any other issues

[4:10:35] Voice 12: i'm a little off topic but i the reason one of the

[4:10:38] Voice 12: things i wanted to talk about today was a number of islanders have talked to me about is there a

[4:10:44] Voice 12: possibility in our island's future to have maybe a small home community or something like that

[4:10:51] Voice 12: where we could have islanders age in place on the island.

[4:10:55] Voice 12: There's lots of older, I don't know the bottom end of that,

[4:10:59] Voice 12: but still starting to age out.

[4:11:00] Voice 12: Folks would like to stay on island

[4:11:02] Voice 12: through their retirement years,

[4:11:03] Voice 12: but worry that the stairs or the environment or whatever,

[4:11:07] Voice 12: just care in general will become something that they need.

[4:11:10] Voice 12: And what are our options to look forward to,

[4:11:13] Voice 12: to try and make something possible like that?

[4:11:16] Voice 12: Whether it's a piece of property,

[4:11:18] Voice 12: whether it's like little container houses

[4:11:20] Voice 12: that people or individuals or couples could live in

[4:11:23] Voice 12: and maybe there's a care or some sort of format like that.

[4:11:26] Voice 12: And I don't know if there's anything in the future

[4:11:29] Voice 12: that we're looking at that that might be possible

[4:11:30] Voice 12: or something that we have to start working on now

[4:11:33] Voice 12: to get

[4:11:33] Voice 12: that going, where we're at with that.

[4:11:35] Voice 12: That's my subject.

[4:11:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): I can speak to a very similar example on the Speedy Island.

[4:11:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): They have a community facility much like this,

[4:11:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): a small medical clinic that shows up every now and then

[4:11:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): when they have the staffing for it

[4:11:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): in the not-for-profit society it's called the last resort society put in elder care homes like

[4:11:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): literally just on the outside here on this land right right

[4:12:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): yes like tiny little uh attached and

[4:12:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): almost like duplex okay units for seniors uh to age of place one levels for 600 square foot units

[4:12:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): um they're rented and they went through the process of rezoning so the land had to be

[4:12:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): make an application for rezoning to increase the density of that parcel and have this mixed use

[4:12:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): institutional residential as for as an example unless you're able to find another parcel that's

[4:12:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): privately

[4:12:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): owned and a society so they have a society that that's their the purpose of society

[4:12:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): is to do this so i think it shows you kind of go from an idea to how do you bring this idea to

[4:12:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): to fruition and if it was people who didn't i'm not saying they don't but

[4:12:50] Voice 7: there's always

[4:12:51] Voice 12: a discussion of folks who don't want to do things on this uh if they wanted to just say okay well

[4:12:58] Voice 12: these four groups of people want to do this together is that a different process not a

[4:13:02] Voice 12: society but just a group of folks who want to have a communal housing project where they can

[4:13:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): all eat the same gross i'm not discriminating and that's not for profit or for profit or market

[4:13:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's just that the the ability to amend the use of the land to a higher density or a higher

[4:13:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): intensity of use needs to be vetted through the same type of application process where you prove

[4:13:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): adequate septic adequate water it's a community water system if there's more than two people

[4:13:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): two different households using a well or a cistern for example then you need

[4:13:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): to violent coastal health to be involved so those all that detail is provided as part of an

[4:13:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): application to say this particular parcel is very well suited to this density and for this type of

[4:13:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): use and we need these legal instruments to protect this in perpetuity to be elder care housing right

[4:13:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): or you know then we determine what's one of the best legal instruments to make this type of thing

[4:14:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): happen because what if it's subdivided flipped and then it's just a bunch of market housing

[4:14:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): right the intent no so we have to really understand what's the purpose of this application

[4:14:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): and how can we ensure that that's there in perpetuity for the benefit of the community

[4:14:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): or is it really just for the benefit of these four people because it's a financial boom for

[4:14:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): them and that's a different conversation right the ltc has to decide is this really in the best

[4:14:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): interest of the community to have this so the proposal needs to be strong in the merits of

[4:14:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): environmental preserve and protect water septic um

[4:14:34] Voice 5: impacts

[4:14:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): to the land addressing any heritage

[4:14:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): conservation issues that the nation's like right now and

[4:14:41] Voice 11: it goes through every zone it sounds

[4:14:43] Voice 11: honest and expensive it is but it also works like to to see leskita it's also a hospice isn't it

[4:14:51] Voice 11: that's why they call it last resort

[4:14:52] Voice 11: yeah yeah it's the last

[4:14:54] Voice 11: resort and it's

[4:14:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): every many of the

[4:14:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): islands have examples now where community groups have come together to do that very few you know

[4:15:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): market housing options for just a family comes together and says we want to subdivide this or

[4:15:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): we want to have

[4:15:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): you know four four families live on that we don't see that as much yet because

[4:15:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): it doesn't seem like a community benefit necessarily sure but where the successful

[4:15:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): successful projects have taken place it's because there's been a concerted effort and need identified by

[4:15:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): a community group and addressed through this sort of creative process so people meet with the planners

[4:15:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): we have a pre-application meeting we bring certain options they go away they get the data that reports

[4:15:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): and bring back the comprehensive package that's compelling stands on its own and the LTC has to

[4:15:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): decide does this meet the official community plan

[4:15:42] Voice 7: and

[4:15:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): can we change the land use file and

[4:15:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): it doesn't meet the official community plan should we amend the official community plan so this kind

[4:15:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): of thing can be included because obviously the OCP was written at a time or maybe this was not

[4:15:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): identified as a need right in the seasonal community sure so exchange yeah so if you have

[4:16:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): questions specific to those types of ideas our planners especially Marlis she's keen to sit down

[4:16:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): with folks and talk about how to make this work yeah you got

[4:16:14] Voice 7: a question or any further questions

[4:16:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): know

[4:16:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): his answer thanks all right that's all we have professionals say again anytime please reach

[4:16:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): out ask questions that's what we're here for right it must hit the

[4:16:26] Voice 6: big bucks one comment

[4:16:28] Voice 6: would be possible if you guys have a few seconds

[4:16:38] Voice 12: i know i have to sit here going love what is that oh yeah

[4:16:46] Voice 6: ADCs and ADXs and stuff.

[4:16:48] Voice 6: Now, I haven't a clue

[4:16:50] Voice 6: what the United States does.

[4:16:52] Voice 6: And I probably

[4:16:54] Voice 6: wouldn't even use the long-term

[4:16:55] Voice 6: still, but it might help.

[4:16:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes, no, thank you very much

[4:17:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): for that gentle reminder.

[4:17:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. All right.

[4:17:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, that...

[4:17:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): There should be

[4:17:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): electric chairs. As soon as you

[4:17:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): utter an acronym, it shocks you.

[4:17:14] Voice 5: Well, I mean, a lot of this

[4:17:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right well we're going to be reading emotion and going into camera i want to thank everyone

[4:17:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): for coming out today said your comments are important we do want to get new and i hope you

[4:17:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): enjoy the rest of the day the sun's missing now but at least it's a nice day out there still

[4:17:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): and uh anytime

[4:17:38] Voice 11: any questions i'm more than happy to because i'm learning too i've learned a lot

[4:17:45] Voice 11: next month um and so your group wants to get together and just chat

[4:17:51] Voice 11: with me i'm happy to i'm about right sit and chat um

[4:17:56] Voice 11: informally i can't give you no no i mean i have no i have no agenda good or bad i just

[4:18:03] Voice 11: want to try again

[4:18:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): yeah we're still we're still recording so um why don't we read the motion

[4:18:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): then we can turn off the camera and then so sorry one of you read the motion

[4:18:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[4:18:18] Voice 4: I move that the meeting be closed to the public, and in terms of the Charter, Part 4, Division

[4:18:23] Voice 4: 3, Section 9, Sub 1, Sub 8, for the purpose of considering personal information about

[4:18:29] Voice 4: an identifiable or has been considered for a position as an officer, employee, or agent

[4:18:34] Voice 4: of the Municipal Committee or another position.

[4:18:38] Voice 4: And I think they actually should read the Local Trust Committee or another physician

[4:18:43] Voice 4: appointed by the processing and

[4:18:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): that the recorder and staff potentially and

[4:18:49] Voice 4: the recorder and staff

[4:18:50] Voice 4: it's a

[4:18:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): second by the university of stanford all those in favor let's carry it okay i'll wait

[4:18:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): If you could turn off the recording there, Lisa.

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 1 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
       Gambier Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Regular Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
June 24, 2025 
Gambier Island Community Centre 
Andy's Bay Road, Gambier Island, BC 
 
Members Present: Laura Patrick, Chair 
 Kate-Louise Stamford, Trustee 
 Joe Bernardo, Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Renée Jamurat, Regional Planning Manager (electronic) 
 Marlis McCargar, Island Planner 
 Sonja Zupanec, Island Planner 
 Warren Dingman, Bylaw Compliance & Enforcement Manager (electronic) 
 Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder (electronic) 
  
Others Present: There were approximately 15 members of the public in attendance. 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
Chair Patrick called the meeting to order at 11:03 a.m. 
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
Chair Patrick acknowledged that the meeting was held on the territory of the Squamish First 
Nation. 
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
The following amendments to the agenda were presented for consideration: 
• Item 8 – Delegation cancelled 
• The agenda was reordered and Item 12.1 will be heard following Item 7 
By general consent, the agenda was approved as amended. 
4. REPORTS 
4.1 Trustee Reports 
Trustee Bernardo reported the following: 
• Attended the Trust Council quarterly meeting;  
• Trust Council received a response from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and 
Housing denying the request for a review of the Islands Trust Act. In May a group 
of former Trustees wrote a public letter to the Minister stating their position that 
a review was not necessary and in response Trustee Bernardo and another 
Trustee signed a public letter disputing the former Trustees position; and 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 2 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• The current Trust Council’s understanding of the mandate includes preservation 
and protection of human rights interests as well as environmental interests. 
 
Trustee Stamford spoke to a local situation that recently occurred on Gambier 
Island and noted the following: 
• An anonymous group of neighbours sent a letter to some local residents 
outlining their intention to actively seek Local Trust Area and Sunshine Coast 
Regional District bylaw compliance on properties across the island and outlined 
specific properties and situations in which their complaints would focus; 
• The overall intent of the complaint system of bylaw enforcement in rural BC, 
outside of health, safety, and environmental issue, is to provide recourse for 
worst case scenarios and regulatory backup if residents are directly impacted by 
neighbour’s behaviour; 
• The letter coincidentally went out on the same day as a Sunshine Coast 
Regional District bylaw officer attended some properties on the island; and 
• It is important to work together to move beyond vexatious complaints and 
support community members. 
4.2 Chair's Report 
Chair Patrick noted work continues on the Trust Policy Statement which is a general 
set of policies that lay out what the preserve and protect mandate means and 
efforts to update document have been ongoing since 2019. She stated the project is 
now moving toward First Reading and the public engagement process and she 
encourages the public to read the draft document available on the website. 
 
4.3 Electoral Area Director's Report 
Director Stamford reported the following: 
• The Sunshine Coast Regional District is working on seven Official Community 
Plans and hopes to bring them together under one document; 
• Met with the Canadian Forces Regional Liaison program for emergency response 
which coordinates military support for local emergencies in conjunction with the 
provincial emergency coordination centre, Coast Guard, BC Wildfire, and RCMP; 
• Participated in West Howe Sound Community Association emergency planning 
workshop which develops neighbourhood pod systems with focus on survival 
and evacuation following an emergency event; and 
• A tentative delegation has been scheduled to present initial findings on a 
feasibility study done by the Sunshine Coast Regional District’s consultant for the 
New Brighton dock. 
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 
Several members of the public spoke to an anonymous letter sent by a local group to some 
residents across the island and the following comments were noted: 
• The group has appointed themselves to govern and monitor how people are living; 
• The letter has deeply impacted the entire island resulting in investigations going forward 
with the Sunshine Coast Regional District Bylaw Enforcement; 
• The five targeted properties have a connection to one individual and the complaint 
appears retaliatory and is an abuse of process; 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 3 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• The concern appears to be how structures are built in an area in which homes have 
been built off grid due to lack of infrastructure; 
• The Sunshine Coast Regional District has indicated the structures are not considered 
dwellings based on the definition of such in the Land Use Bylaw and construction is 
required to meet Step 3 Building Code specifications; 
• Other islands within the Trust Area are not subject to building inspections and Gambier 
should not be either; 
• The Sunshine Coast Regional District building code bylaw should not apply on Gambier 
because of the unique access and terrain situations; 
• Making buildings larger is onerous and less environmentally friendly, and getting 
building materials and qualified tradespeople to the island is difficult; 
• Other islands within the Trust Area have community driven best practices for building 
standards that are established on community values, autonomy, and low impact 
lifestyles; and 
• Islands Trust should resolve to relax building code size restrictions. 
 
Planners and Trustees provided the following clarifications: 
o Islands Trust deals with land use and Land Use Bylaws have regulations around 
sitings and setback; 
o The BC Building Code is separate from Islands Trust and on Gambier Island the 
building code is enforced by the Sunshine Coast Regional District; 
o When the Sunshine Coast Regional District receives a building permit application, 
they refer it to Islands Trust for comment around siting and use; 
o Other islands within the Trust area are required to build to BC Building Code 
standards; 
o Siting and use regulations can vary from island to island depending on their specific 
Land Use Bylaw;  
o The definition of a dwelling can vary, but the criteria for an Occupancy Permit is set 
by the Province; 
o The Islands Trust does not have the authority to modify or waive building code 
requirements. Since the BC Building Code is provincial legislation, any appeals or 
requests related to building code matters must be directed to the appropriate 
provincial authorities. While the Sunshine Coast Regional District administers and 
enforces the building code locally, it cannot change the code itself. A small dwelling 
can receive an occupancy permit only if it is constructed in compliance with the 
current building code, and all new construction must meet these up-to-date code 
requirements; 
o The provincial government would need to amend the Islands Trust Act to give 
authority for Local Trust Committees to amend the building code; and 
o It is suggested that residents provide a delegation to the Sunshine Coast Regional 
District Board asking for input and clarification to seek resolution of the issue. 
  
A member of the public spoke to the Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw 
amendment project and the following comments were recorded: 
• The process is moving very quickly; 
• They have concerns about how the island is governed as the Local Trust Committee is 
constrained due to the limited number of meetings held; 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 4 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• Gambier is divided by a peninsula and many residents are disconnected and do not 
know each other; 
• Issues in different regions of the island vary significantly and island-wide decisions will 
not work; 
• Most of the budget for the project has been spent engaging with First Nations; 
• A notice posted on the public dock a few days prior asked if they had concerns about 
the initiatives, and it has already gathered a few dozen signatures; 
• A request was made to delay the process by one year to allow residents time to fund a 
suitable community engagement process. This would support broader participation, 
allow for informed questions, and ensure that clear accessible materials, including a 
draft of the work completed to date, are made available for public review. 
 
A member of the public indicated they are a water access only resident and feel left out of 
the Official Community Plan/Land Use Bylaw amendment process and asked for open and 
transparent consultation process for water access residents. 
6. MINUTES 
6.1 Local Trust Committee Meeting dated March 25, 2025 - for adoption 
By general consent, the Local Trust Committee meeting minutes of March 
25, 2025 were adopted. 
6.2 Section 26 Resolutions-Without-Meeting Report dated June 17, 2025 
  Received for information. 
6.3 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes - none 
7. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES 
7.1 Follow-up Action List dated June 17, 2025 
A Trustee noted they had previously requested staff arrange a government-to-
government meeting with Squamish First Nation. Once the Nation’s newly elected 
representatives are in place, such a meeting should be scheduled to allow Trustees 
an opportunity to hear the Nation’s perspective beyond the technical aspects of the 
project. 
The Regional Planning Manager noted there was no update on this action item 
but will follow up. 
7.2 Bylaw Enforcement Notice Bylaw Amendment - Staff Report 
The Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement Manager summarized the staff report and 
noted the amendment bylaw had been given three readings in March and, when it 
was sent to Executive Committee, it was realized the bylaw was not quoted 
properly; therefore, the readings were incorrect. 
 
GM-2025-015 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee rescind the first three 
readings of the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 5 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
as “Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw No. 116, 2011, Amendment No. 1, 2025”.  
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-016 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw No. 116, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a first time. 
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-017 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw No. 116, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a second time.  
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-018 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw No. 116, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be read a third time.  
CARRIED 
 
GM-2025-019 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 160, cited as 
“Gambier Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw Enforcement Notification 
Bylaw No. 116, 2011, Amendment No.1, 2025”, be forwarded to the 
Secretary of the Islands Trust for approval by the Executive Committee. 
CARRIED 
8. DELEGATIONS 
8.1 Presentation by Sunshine Coast Regional District on Coastal Floodplain 
Mapping Project 
The delegation was cancelled. 
 
The agenda was re-ordered and Item 12.1 was heard prior to Item 9. 
9. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS 
9.1 PL-DVP-2025-0170 (Moi) - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• The application seeks a variance to the setback to the natural boundary of the 
sea from 15 metres to 4.33 metres to allow for a roofline alteration to an existing 
non-conforming dwelling; 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 6 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• The proposed changes do not increase the building footprint but modify the 
structure that is within the setback; 
• The change increases the vertical aspect of the structure but not the horizontal 
aspect; 
• The proposed roof changes result in a net reduction of floor area within the 
setback as other structures are being removed; 
• The variance permit would only authorize the specific roofline alteration 
proposed and does not legalize or approve the existing dwelling or its siting with 
the setback; and 
• No letters of objection were received following the statutory notification period. 
 
The applicant was in attendance and spoke to the application. 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted: 
• It was clarified that the building is considered non-conforming and most 
changes or alterations would require a development variance permit;  
• The application is a good example of how variances can be managed for older 
structures when work is required on them and a permit is required; and 
• It is not possible to devise a bylaw that can perfectly encompass every situation; 
however, and the Local Trust Committee has discretion to determine what is 
required for a variance to be approved. 
 
GM-2025-020 
It was MOVED and SECONDED  
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee approve issuance of PL-DVP-
2025-0170. 
CARRIED 
The meeting was recessed for a break at 12:58 p.m. and reconvened at 1:30 p.m. 
10. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS 
10.1 Major Project: Gambier Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw Targeted 
Review - Staff Report 
The Planner summarized the staff report and highlighted the following: 
• Squamish First Nation received the draft shoreline Development Permit Area 
and were pleased it provided an example of how their recommendations can be 
implemented; 
• The report seeks endorsement of public engagement topics that the Local Trust 
Committee wishes to engage the community on during the course of this year; 
• It is important to provide clear information to the community about what the 
Local Trust Committee is seeking feedback on at this stage of the project; 
• Further referral to the Advisory Planning Commission is advisable; 
• The engagement work plan was reviewed and developed based on Advisory 
Planning Commission recommendations; and 
• A variety of meeting styles, locations, and times should be considered. 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments and clarifications were noted: 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 7 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• Trustees would like the community to have a sense of what the draft bylaw 
language could look like but also need to ensure that the draft language is a 
starting point for discussion and not final language; 
• It is necessary to make clear that this is the start of engaging on some of the 
language and determining if it works or doesn’t, and what the alternatives might 
be; 
• It can be discerned from community comments that the process is opaque and 
it is necessary to explain to the public that the Local Trust Committee has 
control of the timing of the process but the process itself is mandated through 
legislation; 
• Initial proposed language should be included in the public engagement; 
• The preamble needs to indicate the document is a discussion document and 
not the bylaw; 
• The project topics remain relevant and as new topics arise, they can be 
considered for incorporation into the review or looked at as a separate project; 
• It is important to see how the policy direction in the Official Community Plan 
translates into regulations in the Land Use Bylaw; 
• It is very challenging to connect with islanders across Gambier and time should 
be allowed in each engagement session to discuss emerging topics; 
• Informal community discussion groups provide the opportunity to host small 
gatherings in multiple locations to discuss targeted questions and topics and an 
open-ended discussion on emerging topics could be added; 
• The Development Permit Area and contributions of Squamish Nation topics will 
attract a lot of discussion and the targeted questions are important; however, 
asking questions in general as opposed to giving the community something 
more concrete to work with is problematic; 
• Simple language documents were produced as part of the initial stages of the 
project and that is where the high priority topics were identified; 
• The public seems unaware that the initial stages of the project were undertaken 
and that there have been opportunities to participate and provide input; and 
• The prior public consultation process concluded in 2022 with the consultant’s 
report made available in 2023 and the project represents priority issues 
identified at that time. 
GM-2025-021 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee endorses the public 
engagement topics and timeline presented in the draft Public Engagement 
Workplan dated June 2025 attached to this staff report and that additional 
opportunities for community topics be included in the engagement 
questions. 
CARRIED 
GM-2025-022 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to refer the 
public engagement workplan to the Advisory Planning Commission and 
request confirmation that its members’ will be available and willing to 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 8 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
support targeted implementation or facilitation of up to 10 community 
discussion groups between August – October 2025. 
CARRIED 
 
Discussion ensued on the topic of accessory building regulations and the Planner 
clarified they can provide information to the Local Trust Committee to inform their 
understanding of the scope of options on potential jurisdictional issues in 
preparation for the October protocol meeting with the Sunshine Coast Regional 
District. 
 
GM-2025-023 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to bring back a 
report to the September 9, 2025 Local Trust Committee meeting that 
includes a preliminary assessment of options regarding accessory building 
regulations and the range of associated issues discussed at the June 24, 
2025 Local Trust Committee meeting; and that this report clearly defines the 
parameters of the issues and considers jurisdictional responsibilities of the 
Local Trust Committee, Sunshine Coast Regional District and Province. 
CARRIED 
11. CORRESPONDENCE 
(Correspondence received concerning current applications or projects is posted to the LTC 
webpage) 
11.1 Email dated June 15, 2025 from Howe Sound Biosphere Region Initiative Society 
regarding Request to Sunshine Coast Regional District Parks Lands 
Received for information. 
12. NEW BUSINESS 
12.1 Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement Policy - Staff Report 
The Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement Manager summarized the staff report and 
highlighted the following: 
• The purpose of the document is to incorporate all current standing resolutions 
into a single document and develop a single policy;  
• The bylaw will address vexatious complaints and enable the Local Trust 
Committee to adopt such policies and expand them; 
• The polices have been developed in accordance with Trust Council and Trust 
wide policies; 
• The policy encompasses the entire Local Trust Area and some areas have 
adopted subsections for associated islands; and 
• The Local Trust Committee can adopt a resolution to amend the policy as they 
see fit. 
Discussion ensued and the following comments and clarifications were noted: 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 9 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• Much of the policy is standardized against other Local Trust Area policies and 
each Local Trust Area has adopted specific references and policies for their 
specific needs; 
• The Local Trust Committee can adopt their own policies, has authority to close 
files, and has considerable ability to determine how bylaw enforcement is 
conducted within their Local Trust Area; 
• If a Bylaw Enforcement officer discovers a different infraction or contravention 
that no one has complained about while investigating a complaint the approach 
under this policy can reflect any language adopted to restricting enforcement to 
having a narrow focus based on the complaint only; 
• The Local Trust Committee can determine if they wish to receive full reports on 
open files and determine if a file is closed or not; and 
• The existing standing resolutions can be rescinded as they become redundant. 
GM-2025-024 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee adopt the proposed Bylaw 
Compliance and Enforcement Policy.  
CARRIED 
GM-2025-025 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee rescind standing resolutions 
GM-2023-001 and GM-2020-006. 
CARRIED 
GM-2025-026 
 It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that staff prepare for the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee’s next 
meeting a draft Request for Decision to amend the Bylaw Compliance and 
Enforcement Policy to: 
1.  Limit investigation to only those infractions specifically identified in a 
complaint and  
2.   Require staff to report to the Local Trust Committee any files closed 
due to vexatious nature. 
CARRIED 
 
12.2 Accessory Building Bylaw Regulations - Verbal Discussion 
The Planner noted that the Land Use Bylaw does not allow accessory buildings such 
as sheds and workshops without a primary dwelling and there is opportunity for the 
Local Trust Committee to consider whether that is something they would like to 
explore as part of the Official Community Plan/Land Use Bylaw review. 
 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted: 
• If an approved building permit is submitted, one is permitted to have an 
accessory building which is not an accessory dwelling; 
• The Local Trust Committee could define the type of structure allowed, such as a 
shed or picnic structure, without a principal dwelling on the property;  

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 10 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
• There can be confusion about the meaning of “accessory” which can include 
accessory building, accessory dwelling, or accessory to a principal unit; 
• If there is one building on a lot with a kitchen, it is considered a principal 
dwelling regardless of size; 
• The Local Trust Committee will discuss dwelling definitions and priorities with 
the Sunshine Coast Regional District at the upcoming protocol meeting; 
• It would be necessary to apply for a building permit to convert an accessory 
building to a dwelling; and 
• If the topic is added to the Official Community Plan review it allows for 
community input and discussion of options. 
 
GM-2025-027 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee add item “Discussion of 
Accessory Buildings” to the protocol meeting with Sunshine Coast Regional 
District happening in October, 2025. 
CARRIED 
13. STAFF REPORTS 
13.1 Highlights of Trust Conservancy May 27, 2025 Board Meeting 
Received for information.  
13.2 Applications Report dated June 17, 2025 
Received for information. 
13.3 Trustee and Local Expense Report dated April, 2025 
Received for information. 
13.4 Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions 
Received for information. 
13.5 First Nations Relationship Building Update - none 
13.6 Local Trust Committee Webpage  
No updates requested. 
14. WORK PROGRAM 
14.1 Active Projects Report dated June 17, 2025 
Received for information. 
14.2 Future Projects Report dated June 17, 2025 
Received for information. 
15. UPCOMING MEETINGS 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 11 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
15.1 Gambier Local Trust Committee request to change the September 9, 2025, 
10:00 am meeting to electronic. 
 
GM-2025-028 
It was MOVED and SECONDED 
that Gambier Local Trust Committee request staff to change the September 
9, 2025, 10:00 a.m. meeting from in-person to electronic. 
CARRIED 
15.2 Next Regular Meeting Scheduled for Tuesday, September 9, 2025 to be held 
electronically. 
The agenda was re-ordered and Item 17 was heard before Item 16. 
16. CLOSED MEETING 
16.1 Motion to Close the Meeting 
GM-2025-029 
   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) for the purpose of considering: 
• (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 local trust committee; 
AND that the recorder and staff attend the meeting. 
CARRIED 
The regular meeting was closed to the public at 3:22 p.m. 
16.2 Recall to Order 
  The meeting was adjourned following the in-camera session. 
16.3 Rise and Report 
Chair Patrick will rise and report at the next meeting that October, 17 2023 in-
camera meeting minutes were adopted and that the Gambier Island Local Trust 
Committee appointed James Quail and Steve MacDonald to the Gambier Island 
Advisory Planning Commission, with a term commencing immediately and ending 
on October 17, 2025. 
17. PUBLIC COMMENTS 
A member of the public noted they reached out to their MLAs office to voice concerns the 
community has about the anonymous letter and indicated Gambier does not have the 
infrastructure in place to support large dwellings and the accessory building situation has 
come up because people are choosing to live in a smaller more affordable dwelling. They 
were told by the Sunshine Coast Regional District that if Islands Trust allows people to live 
in an accessory building the Regional District would remove themselves from these 
complaints. 

ADOPTED 
Gambier Island ADOPTED 12 of 12 
Local Trust Committee Minutes 
June 24, 2025 
The Chair clarified the Local Trust Committee has asked staff to prepare a report 
prior to a joint protocol meeting with the Regional District and the Planner stated 
that the report can confirm the scope of influence the Local Trust Committee has 
and equivalencies that the building inspectors may have. 
A member of the public asked if there is possibility to have a tiny home community to allow 
older residents to stay on island with aid. 
The Planner referred to the Lasqueti Island community facility that features elder 
care homes and a society that manages the housing that came about when a 
rezoning application for a mixed-use residential parcel was submitted and there is 
ability to amend certain parcels to allow a higher density and these types of 
applications are vetted through the same process that looks at adequate water and 
septic capabilities along with a housing agreement and / or covenant attached to 
the land and use. 
18. ADJOURNMENT 
By general consent, the meeting was adjourned following the in-camera meeting at 
3:40 p.m. 
 
 
_________________________ 
Laura Patrick, Chair 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder