Denman LTC regular meeting, 20 January 2026

[0:00:00] We're there. Good morning everybody. Thanks for joining us today for this regular meeting of the

[0:00:07] Devon Island Local Trust Committee. I want to begin by making the meeting by acknowledge and we're

[0:00:12] fortunate to be able to gather the locations across the territory of the Coast Savage people. I'm

[0:00:17] David Balaakhtam, Mayor of Devon Island Local Trust Committee. I'm joined today by your

[0:00:22] demand local trustees, David Graham and myself, Orflick. Together we make up the Devon Island

[0:00:27] Trust Committee. This meeting is being live streamed and recorded for those who are unable

[0:00:31] to attend the person today. The recording we posted the Honest Trust website for future viewing.

[0:00:37] We have some staff members joining us today. We have Mars Carter, our island planner. We have

[0:00:42] Nurse Chadrick, our other island planner who's our housing specialist and married other hats too.

[0:00:49] We do appreciate her coming out to join us in person today. We have Lisa Miller who is our

[0:00:54] our recording secretary. Are we expecting one today?

[0:01:00] I don't believe so.

[0:01:02] So that's it for our staff. Okay. That's wonderful.

[0:01:08] So just to let you know, this means a fish for one for your local

[0:01:10] custody, make decisions about land use planning,

[0:01:12] management, discuss relevant business, or what I have this

[0:01:15] place to plan our staff at the right to a state risk that

[0:01:19] workplace. So trust me is a part we have an agenda. Is there

[0:01:23] any additional or

[0:01:26] So we're gonna go

[0:01:35] So

[0:01:39] The first recording press

[0:01:41] Yes, I don't have a whole little lunch as we have now made it six months for this meeting

[0:01:52] I

[0:01:54] I've been involved with the trustee onboarding working group,

[0:01:59] which is about sort of orienting,

[0:02:01] generating material and planning for training new trustees

[0:02:05] as we come into the new term.

[0:02:07] I had lots of thoughts about how I was oriented

[0:02:13] in terms of sort of finding a term

[0:02:15] and resources that I feel that I didn't get.

[0:02:18] So I've been very excited to get to be a part of that.

[0:02:22] And yet looking forward to hopefully being able

[0:02:24] to start things off next term in a good way

[0:02:28] for incoming trustees.

[0:02:30] And not this Thursday, but next Thursday,

[0:02:35] I will be going to the Comox Valley

[0:02:37] elected officials forum in the afternoon.

[0:02:42] It's not a whole bunch of immediate business for us,

[0:02:45] but I think it's a useful thing

[0:02:47] to just go and have an ear in.

[0:02:50] And that's about what I've got on my radar at the moment.

[0:02:54] Thank you.

[0:02:55] Thank you.

[0:02:56] Lots of inquiries from our community on various issues and concerns.

[0:03:02] I appreciate people reaching out and asking for my opinion.

[0:03:09] I rarely use social media for a number of reasons, but I did have to jump in.

[0:03:14] calling the waters upon the academy.

[0:03:18] What many islanders, some islanders have thought of,

[0:03:23] but it's this huge resort of people.

[0:03:25] They're not that, the island, happy to say

[0:03:30] we haven't even seen a rezoning application

[0:03:33] or anything, anything around it.

[0:03:35] So everything at this point,

[0:03:36] it's someone's idea, a great idea.

[0:03:38] And all that great ideas, some will work, some will work.

[0:03:41] So we'll just leave it at that.

[0:03:43] I did help to camp the original planning committee, which was asked to look at our expenditures

[0:03:52] in light of the fact that we're at the tail end of the 2016-2017 budget discussion and

[0:03:58] finalizing it with any department.

[0:04:01] And I don't think we made any drastic changes at all.

[0:04:04] I don't think we made any changes at all.

[0:04:06] So we're not really asking financial planning, which is the trustee committee that really

[0:04:12] informs the Trust Council as a whole, that's where the budget sits.

[0:04:17] I don't know what we're looking at, I can't remember what the increase in tax, but it's going to be a bit hurtful for all of us taxpayers, but there's a reason, you know,

[0:04:26] good government costs money, and the work that costs money, that's just the reality of the budget.

[0:04:31] I'm looking forward to this meeting. This housing report is still all overdue and I'm

[0:04:37] excited to see what may move into the first stage of the draft by-laws. So that's good.

[0:04:44] Thank you.

[0:04:45] Well, as noted, it's for once a very short period between last day and this meeting, and

[0:04:52] of course we have the holiday break there and there, which is sometime in that time. So

[0:04:57] So not a great deal to report on the big picture.

[0:05:01] I will continue to go on about policy statement,

[0:05:04] the public consultation period,

[0:05:06] I believe, leads on February the 5th.

[0:05:09] So there's still time to get in your comments and feedback.

[0:05:14] There should be, if you are not online,

[0:05:19] there is extra library.

[0:05:21] There could be a copy of the draft policy data

[0:05:24] along with feedback forms

[0:05:26] have self-discent and emos.

[0:05:29] So it is hopefully relatively easy to give you feedback.

[0:05:32] It is much appreciated the more we get the better it is.

[0:05:35] Because we just love waiting through paper.

[0:05:38] But those individual comments are the most impactful comments.

[0:05:44] Because oftentimes we get these long things

[0:05:47] from organizations, all that material kind of pull.

[0:05:51] The personal comments really, I think,

[0:05:54] make a big effect to the trustees.

[0:05:56] because the personal ones are person and people get samples that we really can relate to.

[0:06:02] And it works out quite well. I'm looking forward to seeing everything come to Trust Council.

[0:06:09] I'm really fingers crossed hoping that we can get this draft into a final form,

[0:06:15] get it to the minister, and hopefully get it adopted so we have a clear and bright path forward.

[0:06:21] which asked her, how many years, 29 years?

[0:06:25] Like, so the one disappointing thing I will say,

[0:06:28] and I will apologize for all this,

[0:06:31] it's supposed to be a dynamic document

[0:06:32] that's constantly being updated.

[0:06:36] We didn't.

[0:06:37] And so, and that's why this process

[0:06:40] is a little bit more involved

[0:06:42] and a little bit more intense

[0:06:44] because we're trying to make up for lost time

[0:06:47] because instead of freaking little thing here,

[0:06:50] little bit there and sort of teak it up to speed, we're just sitting on it. So this

[0:06:56] update is substantial. But I will say from a personal point of view, I'm pretty

[0:07:05] happy with what we've done. There's certainly every word I like, no other

[0:07:11] things I disagree with. But in the same consensus, the documents of old can I live with it?

[0:07:17] Yeah, can I work with you know, and I think that it all is going to give us much more positive work for much more clear report because there's been a lot of things, especially in the conditions that it's really no percent.

[0:07:30] And you know we've been we've been awkwardly sort of going through the process where this is actually going to give firm proper read direction for stress so I encourage the feedback.

[0:07:44] I don't think I have a huge amount of report because this is the first LPC since the last LPC getting a lemon island.

[0:07:52] So I can't even say what's been going on anyplace else.

[0:07:54] So we'll be well.

[0:07:56] All right.

[0:07:57] The electoral director is not in attendance today.

[0:08:00] So soon as he said regrets.

[0:08:04] So we now we're at public comments, otherwise known as town hall.

[0:08:08] Anybody can see the same raise your hands

[0:08:11] Just for the minute take if you would keep your name

[0:08:15] Try to keep it through a couple minutes, but

[0:08:18] We don't so even anything to address trust me. Well issues deal with

[0:08:30] Anything

[0:08:33] Where's my list? That's probably a second. You're concerned that trustees are in I'm sure that's

[0:08:39] Okay.

[0:08:40] One point of what we're just for for paper.

[0:08:44] Just for trusting.

[0:08:50] Goodbye.

[0:08:52] Well then just don't stick it.

[0:08:59] Alright so now we're going to move on for minutes. We have local trust committee special minutes.

[0:09:04] June, two point six point in our readback machine.

[0:09:08] I didn't catch anybody see anything on that.

[0:09:11] Who are the minutes?

[0:09:12] I tried to find something, you know,

[0:09:14] that's my, that's my,

[0:09:15] who these bell chatteling through.

[0:09:18] I think at the bell, very good, very good.

[0:09:21] Thank you.

[0:09:22] So by general to seven, we can adopt those minutes.

[0:09:24] Then we have both custom minutes

[0:09:26] dated December 16th for adoption.

[0:09:30] Same thing by general to seven, we can adopt those minutes.

[0:09:32] Um, so now we'll move to section seven on patient 21,

[0:09:37] a poll action list in January 13th.

[0:09:41] Anything for anybody,

[0:09:43] I'd like to see the question on page 26,

[0:09:50] number seven, it says to repair costs recovery agreement

[0:09:54] and LSR, I don't know if you've developed that.

[0:09:59] Oh, and the legal services request.

[0:10:02] It is.

[0:10:03] So I think it's important when we can't

[0:10:08] spell those things out, I guess I could try them.

[0:10:12] And services, we have too many TLAs,

[0:10:18] three letter acronyms.

[0:10:19] Yeah, thank you.

[0:10:21] And I hope I just don't, page 25.

[0:10:26] It was just a question on the public hearing

[0:10:30] and media information.

[0:10:31] I'm not gonna get the sedated.

[0:10:34] 17?

[0:10:35] Yeah.

[0:10:36] Are both files going to be looked at?

[0:10:39] Same time, yeah.

[0:10:40] Okay.

[0:10:41] The same.

[0:10:45] All right, so we'll move on to applications.

[0:10:48] We have H2A.

[0:10:50] My goodness, it didn't put dashes in this.

[0:10:53] PLDT20250156, preliminary standard work.

[0:11:00] So, over to you, kind of, Cari.

[0:11:02] Yeah, so I wasn't the one that processed this application,

[0:11:06] I am happy to give a little intro

[0:11:09] and I can answer any questions that you might have.

[0:11:14] So this application is for retroactive development permit

[0:11:17] within development permit area to use deep slopes.

[0:11:20] It relates to an existing single family dwelling

[0:11:22] and a power utility shed on a 3.3 vector crystal.

[0:11:26] The development occurred between 2016 and 2018

[0:11:30] without the required development permit.

[0:11:32] No new developments being proposed at this time.

[0:11:37] So this DPA2 steep slopes is intended to protect

[0:11:40] the natural environment ecosystem and biodiversity,

[0:11:43] retain large old trees for ecological and habitat value,

[0:11:47] and the area is characterized by slopes greater than 60%

[0:11:50] with potential landslide risk, high ecological value,

[0:11:54] including uncommon plant communities as well like habitat.

[0:11:58] The property is zoned R2, the Melandies By-law,

[0:12:02] and the existing residents of PowerShell

[0:12:05] comply with some regulations, including setbacks and aids.

[0:12:09] However, there's the requirement for a DPA,

[0:12:13] for tree removal, construction of buildings and structures,

[0:12:17] and development of the impervious surfaces.

[0:12:22] So the applicants provided a professional environmental report

[0:12:26] as required.

[0:12:27] And there was also a geotechnical report

[0:12:29] that was not required but also submitted.

[0:12:36] So the report provides retroactive assessment of site impacts and recommendations for restoration and enhancement.

[0:12:45] This this deep slope currently supports regenerating native vegetation, including our mucus for active restoration planting is not required at this time, but it is recommended that scotch broom and invasive species is removed and damaged using best practices.

[0:13:02] No further clearing should occur within the steep slope without a new assessment and allowing

[0:13:10] the slope to re-naturalize or improve slope stability and habitat quality.

[0:13:15] Staff are satisfied with that the DPA2 objectives have been met through the professional assessment

[0:13:20] of proposed conditions and that the recommendations from the environmental consulting firm have

[0:13:28] been incorporated into the term of the condition.

[0:13:30] So based on this staff recommend approval

[0:13:32] of the development permits.

[0:13:35] Thank you.

[0:13:36] Is the outfit with us today?

[0:13:43] So you have any questions for us?

[0:13:45] Thanks for your interest.

[0:13:47] Another question.

[0:13:49] Make a comment.

[0:13:52] A tremendous amount of information,

[0:13:54] really in depth report from both professionals.

[0:13:59] And even though the geotechnical survey

[0:14:01] wasn't required. I think it's a good thing to have considering the steep slope and it

[0:14:07] just gives you a kind of an assessment. Okay, versus Dr. Foulter. I think that's a good thing.

[0:14:12] So, you know.

[0:14:13] Yeah, it was kind of wild to me that it wasn't required. I didn't realize it wouldn't have

[0:14:17] been, but I just thought we'd build our house on the other end and then we kind of were

[0:14:23] pushed to not sell. So then we kind of, you know, we get all these permits and...

[0:14:28] It's been a long time and I have no other concerns with questions.

[0:14:35] Similar might be happy to make that.

[0:14:40] Yeah, I know.

[0:14:41] I know this was very stressful.

[0:14:43] And I know that this process has not been like an overnight one.

[0:14:47] And I applaud you on going through the thing.

[0:14:49] I hope it was not painful on your part.

[0:14:52] But I think this is, yeah, I mean, I'm very happy obviously to see this, the anxiety

[0:14:58] go away. That was my big priority in this. So yeah.

[0:15:06] Sure. I moved from the Deman Island Local Trust Committee approved the

[0:15:10] release of developed permits PLDP20250156.

[0:15:18] To second that. Any further discussion? Call the question. Okay. Thank you.

[0:15:25] I'll just offer a brief comment a little bit.

[0:15:31] This is the second Africa I've seen

[0:15:34] where the amount of information that's been presented

[0:15:38] from the African has been above and beyond.

[0:15:41] It's very much appreciated.

[0:15:43] It's nice when you go through something

[0:15:48] and you have the questions

[0:15:49] because all the questions have been answered.

[0:15:52] So, well done.

[0:15:54] And on your way.

[0:15:58] Thank you so much.

[0:16:00] All right, so now we'll move on.

[0:16:03] Now, unfortunately, we're at the pass of the ahead of schedule.

[0:16:06] So we're at page 81, major project

[0:16:10] that the Housing Official Committee plan,

[0:16:12] the Landlays Mile, I'll review the project

[0:16:14] after the order.

[0:16:16] Right, again, I'm not gonna do it.

[0:16:17] Okay, it's fine.

[0:16:19] Yeah, I have a, I have a track to do, please,

[0:16:21] and I'm gonna tell you what I want to do.

[0:16:26] Yeah, so I'm going to use you a fairly well,

[0:16:29] staff report with fairly large details

[0:16:33] of reported paths to relating to all of the outstanding

[0:16:38] options related to the housing project.

[0:16:46] So the housing project, and in your mind,

[0:16:50] you have made a number of decisions already

[0:16:53] related to some of the language.

[0:16:55] We've done that past meeting,

[0:16:58] and I've tried to kind of document that as best I could

[0:17:01] both on, it's at the back of the report,

[0:17:06] the short staff report,

[0:17:07] and then the list of options I've also provided

[0:17:12] a list of where the draft language is already gonna be.

[0:17:15] So what we're mostly,

[0:17:17] what is contained in the discussion report

[0:17:22] are pretty much all of the questions options related

[0:17:27] to density, addition or removal of density,

[0:17:32] basically kind of the flavor.

[0:17:36] In the appendix one, which is the list of options

[0:17:41] that are being, that are contained

[0:17:43] and have also been reviewed,

[0:17:45] I have indicated those options that I would say,

[0:17:50] are more straightforward in those options that are more detailed thinking and decision making.

[0:17:58] So you can see that there's sort of like two levels of decision making.

[0:18:02] There's the ones that are easy to make and the ones that are maybe difficult to make.

[0:18:08] What we, because Smiles is also participating in the development of the dialogue, which

[0:18:16] So if we have been picking away at your not had such a

[0:18:19] direction, what we would like is to come away with the direction

[0:18:25] on the whole thing.

[0:18:27] That would be the ideal outcome.

[0:18:30] The next idea would be most of it with maybe some questions

[0:18:35] or particular things that you might want to come back with.

[0:18:39] So that's what I'm hoping for this discussion.

[0:18:42] So I thought maybe the best way to move forward

[0:18:47] is just to go through the items as they're

[0:18:50] listed in the report.

[0:18:53] And then you can ask me questions that you

[0:18:55] might have about what the option has been presented,

[0:19:01] any of the details around that.

[0:19:02] And then you can move to, and I can get a your decision

[0:19:08] related to that particular point.

[0:19:12] Does that seem like a good way to move through it?

[0:19:16] Yes, good.

[0:19:17] Yeah, okay, great.

[0:19:19] So that means we would start at,

[0:19:21] I don't have, so my number is like something

[0:19:23] that we would-

[0:19:24] Is that page?

[0:19:25] Page 93 of the agenda or page eight of the report?

[0:19:28] Page eight, page eight of the report.

[0:19:30] Yeah, oh, page seven of the report, really.

[0:19:34] So page seven of the report,

[0:19:36] the very first item here is a post agenda.

[0:19:39] So for post objectives.

[0:19:41] So objectives have been updated to reflect the values

[0:19:46] and I think that the key values that come out of this process

[0:19:52] preservation and protection of the environment,

[0:19:55] community diversity, which means housing options

[0:19:58] and addressing first nations.

[0:20:00] So the objectives are they build on what's in the existing and then they suggest some tweaks.

[0:20:11] So we can start there and if there's any questions about your concerns,

[0:20:16] yeah, just move through and I'll get your ideas and your questions.

[0:20:21] I hope concerns on the principles and objectives are not that different.

[0:20:33] Yeah, I mean, I noticed that in the attachment point where you're sort of renewing these when you've got the cross out.

[0:20:46] The only thing I think the objectives are good. I think they're all as they should be. This is fine. The thing I noticed with the cross out version is that objective three goes from setting an overall residential density of the island.

[0:21:00] goes from setting an overall residential density of the islands at the time of the adoption

[0:21:07] of this plan, which was back then, which has moved to a First Nations-focused objective.

[0:21:13] And that's not a changing of that thing.

[0:21:18] I know that that's not a problem.

[0:21:20] I'm not worried about that.

[0:21:21] But I do worry that there might be some people who look at this and go, oh, they're going

[0:21:24] to, they don't have your care about residential density.

[0:21:26] They just want to worry about the First Nations,

[0:21:29] which is not the case either.

[0:21:31] But I could see how that misinterpretation could come

[0:21:35] from a cross-zone version within a red line

[0:21:37] or blue text version of a totally different objective.

[0:21:42] So I just wanted to fight that that was the thing

[0:21:44] that I noticed, but again, these are all correct.

[0:21:48] They're the same concern for density

[0:21:50] and still it's a suite of the other objectives.

[0:21:52] Nothing has been missed.

[0:21:53] Something has been added.

[0:21:55] It happens to also be objective three.

[0:21:57] That's not putting one concern of the other.

[0:21:59] So that's more for the record than for, you know,

[0:22:03] you're not gonna be able to do that.

[0:22:05] So no additional direction,

[0:22:06] you just wanna, you just make things like that.

[0:22:08] Just noticing that that is the word

[0:22:10] from how that's written.

[0:22:11] Someone could be like, well, I only care,

[0:22:13] blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, it's not that.

[0:22:15] Yeah, yeah.

[0:22:16] So anyways, what happened now?

[0:22:19] Objectives all defined to me.

[0:22:22] Okay, so then we move into sort of

[0:22:24] the next content area, which is really about the density,

[0:22:31] like the stringent density limitations.

[0:22:34] And they fall into the categories of the density bank,

[0:22:39] sub-th

[0:22:48] and the density cap.

[0:22:49] So because as I mentioned,

[0:22:50] the density bank question and the density cap question.

[0:22:54] So let's start with any questions that you might have

[0:22:56] around those two and then I can get into the discussion.

[0:23:03] Okay, it's a good old density bank.

[0:23:06] And I'm still up in this,

[0:23:08] that there isn't a goal for the attention bank

[0:23:11] but I'll just start with that.

[0:23:12] I guess my concern is that I know that the

[0:23:16] End of Conservancy Association prides themselves

[0:23:18] on being able to acquire a land.

[0:23:20] And when they do require land,

[0:23:23] and then they rezone to the conservation,

[0:23:26] they like to know that that residential density

[0:23:30] that existed on the land prior to zoning

[0:23:32] is going to go some ways.

[0:23:34] And the policy says that would do it for the poor.

[0:23:38] And so I think, okay, so that's a valid, that's important.

[0:23:43] It's worked well since the start of the pandemic.

[0:23:46] It's important to realize that the density bank

[0:23:48] has no impact on growth.

[0:23:51] So reallocation of existing density.

[0:23:53] And that's really important.

[0:23:54] Sometimes even in this report,

[0:23:56] there's your first issue on page eight of your report,

[0:24:02] issues of the density bank,

[0:24:04] talks about the data counts for secondary suites,

[0:24:07] underestimated the total potential population growth.

[0:24:09] So you allow that idea that the density bank

[0:24:13] has to affect growth into your report,

[0:24:16] which is a common concern and a common mistake

[0:24:19] that people do, but the density of ink,

[0:24:20] the way it works has no impact.

[0:24:23] So reallocation existing densities.

[0:24:26] And I know that the car community is really comfortable

[0:24:29] with that, they might be idea that we're just

[0:24:32] taking these densities and using them more appropriately.

[0:24:36] So that's one of my concerns.

[0:24:40] The other issue you've got, the second one there

[0:24:44] talks about how it could block

[0:24:47] affordable housing opportunities elsewhere.

[0:24:50] And that's half true, but we also have in the current way

[0:24:55] we look at housing, affordable housing,

[0:24:58] we have allowed a percentage increase for affordable housing.

[0:25:01] So you could say, well, yes, the bank's empty,

[0:25:04] but we still have the provision

[0:25:05] of allowing our population to grow.

[0:25:07] So as I say, I'm not convinced,

[0:25:12] I accept the problem of embedding it in the OCP.

[0:25:17] That's problematic.

[0:25:19] Is that a parts ministerial?

[0:25:21] All the other things that are associated with those key changes.

[0:25:24] I don't know if we can put it in the land use file.

[0:25:27] I don't know why you ended up in the OCP as an attachment.

[0:25:30] And an easier bylaw to for the local community or the local local trust committee to to amend.

[0:25:38] And maybe that's a question for planets. I don't know why you ended up.

[0:25:43] Yeah, because we kind of intended to be current them and it was a uniform. So it ended up for some reason as an attachment towards social community plan without being cautioned at the time that well you realize that you're going to change anything in that attachment because it's attached to the SDP you're going to have to follow the entire legislative requirements of changing your SDP.

[0:26:07] perhaps at that point, Luis Valle and I were about to do,

[0:26:10] but we didn't think about that.

[0:26:12] Thank you for that.

[0:26:13] I mean, we should put it elsewhere.

[0:26:14] We did, so it's in the wrong place, perhaps.

[0:26:18] And I appreciate the fact that it's an administrative,

[0:26:21] it's not something that's easy to administer

[0:26:23] from a staff perspective, to get that.

[0:26:27] So I'm really ambivalent, I'm at 50-50 on,

[0:26:29] but I'm going to scrap that quarter.

[0:26:31] Just keep it really clean and simplified

[0:26:35] and easier to manage.

[0:26:39] I will just say that the density transfer policy would remain.

[0:26:44] So that is the ability to,

[0:26:45] so that you're not banking and storing densities,

[0:26:48] but the ability for say the conservancy to do,

[0:26:51] to transfer densities to another property

[0:26:53] would still exist.

[0:26:55] I guess, and that works when you've got those two occurrences

[0:27:00] happening at the same time,

[0:27:01] but they really do,

[0:27:02] it's long, it's rare for us to be looking

[0:27:05] at least property that's kind of indicated through a nonprofit.

[0:27:12] And then we can take that density.

[0:27:13] So having those two things happen at the same time,

[0:27:16] that's pretty rare, which is why the bank is created

[0:27:19] to just wait for that opportunity.

[0:27:25] No growth reallocation of existing density

[0:27:28] supports the whole focus of that density.

[0:27:32] So I don't know what to do with my concerns

[0:27:35] So it's sort of,

[0:27:46] Trustee Graham is saying in that regard,

[0:27:48] and I think that yes, there is some utility

[0:27:50] in being able to sort of allow for that kind of time delay

[0:27:55] between things.

[0:27:56] That said, I mean, I think with, you know,

[0:27:59] stronger policies and zoning regulations,

[0:28:04] we don't necessarily need that.

[0:28:06] If we can make that work without, you know,

[0:28:09] a piece of, because unless we have a clear idea

[0:28:13] how we're going to administer that.

[0:28:16] Otherwise, how it's going to function,

[0:28:19] the concept is a good one.

[0:28:21] But unless we have a place to put that

[0:28:23] that is nimble and easy to maintain,

[0:28:29] having strong policies and guidelines about how we do it

[0:28:32] just takes away a piece of administrative clutter.

[0:28:37] And as we say, that density transfer capacity is not

[0:28:43] on and I agree that you have to get the timings right. That said, you can zone something for

[0:28:52] conservation and leave the density there, I would assume. In fact, I mean, I guess it doesn't exist

[0:29:00] after you sort of conservation to something great, but I agree that there ought to be some way to do

[0:29:06] that, but until we have a really clear idea of how we would administer that, it feels like it's

[0:29:12] is adding extra complication and extra steps

[0:29:15] to a process that maybe doesn't need it.

[0:29:17] And the danger and the much more confusing part

[0:29:21] is like almost everybody conflates the density cap

[0:29:26] and the density bank.

[0:29:27] And the consents are the same.

[0:29:29] And I know you don't, David.

[0:29:31] But everybody seems to think, why don't you say that?

[0:29:37] Certainly when I started this term,

[0:29:39] I was not clear on the difference between the two.

[0:29:41] So, you know, the things there's,

[0:29:44] it's become a buzzword.

[0:29:47] As a result of the other, you know,

[0:29:49] work and changes we're trying to do,

[0:29:51] then people are like,

[0:29:51] oh, they're trying to get rid of the density bank.

[0:29:52] It's like, they're trying to just not have proof.

[0:29:54] It's like, nope, not the same thing, different things.

[0:29:57] But I see where the confusion is.

[0:29:59] And if the density bank is not actively providing us

[0:30:03] utility that we don't otherwise have,

[0:30:06] I'm not sure that it makes sense

[0:30:07] to like administratively maintain it.

[0:30:11] And I'm kind of going back to the BHABC recommendation

[0:30:15] as well, which were, let's move it on.

[0:30:18] And crucially, and I think more important recommendation

[0:30:22] from them in this particular regard

[0:30:24] is simplify the vitals and the Lend Use of the OCP.

[0:30:29] So to get those things to be more and more streamlined

[0:30:31] and more easy for people to understand,

[0:30:34] that's going to be more to facilitate getting housing

[0:30:39] And any trust-related work on this island

[0:30:44] is going to be helped by making that document less

[0:30:47] difficult to understand.

[0:30:49] So I'm fine to move it along with the intention

[0:30:54] to create stronger provisions in the policies.

[0:30:58] But I do hear you.

[0:30:59] And I mean, if there's a strong,

[0:31:01] if there's a clear way to, if there is another home

[0:31:09] the density bank that allows for that sort of time delay transfer that staff can think of

[0:31:16] then of all years. But if there isn't something and we have to invent another thing whole cloth,

[0:31:22] I'd be inclined to go with let's strengthen our policies instead.

[0:31:27] Well I would ask that, what about the staff density banks?

[0:31:31] There is a one.

[0:31:31] No, it's trying to answer.

[0:31:34] A density bank?

[0:31:34] Yeah.

[0:31:35] Okay, then there's a turn of the question.

[0:31:37] No, no, because I just, because I read the past and I just wanted to get there was another way of being managed that actually is better than what the perceptions would say.

[0:31:48] Well, the turn is definitely not doing anything better than we are.

[0:31:53] I would have to agree with you because I don't think you're talking about this.

[0:31:56] It's more. It's true.

[0:31:58] Yeah, because of Saturna, of course,

[0:32:02] they've had a lot of work, so land trusts and all that,

[0:32:05] but it takes a lot of destinies.

[0:32:09] And they started out with Saturna, I believe,

[0:32:10] because of Mars Canada.

[0:32:12] Because Mars Canada bought like half the island

[0:32:15] and didn't transfer the density.

[0:32:18] So the island lost something in the name,

[0:32:21] so 350 destinies.

[0:32:24] So that's when they started doing this banking.

[0:32:30] I will just add that this would be sort of shifting the way that Denman takes about density, right?

[0:32:35] Like if we're not focusing on a bank and a cap as much, but more focusing on really strong policies

[0:32:41] that guide where we want to see development, it's less about the number and where and where is

[0:32:46] appropriate and where makes sense. And sort of focus, shifting that focus from that and less about,

[0:32:53] okay, there's seven in the bank. So that means that seven houses can be built anywhere.

[0:32:58] but it is so yeah it's the shift.

[0:33:03] So the same concurrency purchase of diesel activists, three density sold, we go through the whole process.

[0:33:13] Is there a way that basically internally with that process that those three densities get banked within the land so that in the future they're going to get drawn out and present someplace else?

[0:33:25] So, I mean, I think part of the reason that the density bank exists is because there is already a restriction on what land to be zoned for.

[0:33:37] And if you, they're coming back to Marles' comment, like if you have very, very clear criteria around what you can be zoning for, you're actually, and how you look at the rezoning, you are limiting quite considerably what can actually happen where.

[0:33:53] So, yeah, I mean, the point is, do you look at this through a lens of, you know, we only have this amount and you're only restricting it to what's possible by these numbers, which means that you may be giving up the opportunity for say, these are how it comes in, it says,

[0:34:14] as they do 10 units or what have you,

[0:34:17] and you've only got seven in the density rank.

[0:34:19] So there's that, and we're already kind of

[0:34:22] facing that challenge now

[0:34:24] with some of the reasons that are happening.

[0:34:26] So I think that's the big question here is like,

[0:34:30] does it make sense to have,

[0:34:32] and I totally understand this like we've made it a thing,

[0:34:34] but you're having opportunity in your by-law

[0:34:37] to actually consider these desks,

[0:34:40] but with a very, very clear criteria

[0:34:43] about how you consider them.

[0:34:45] It is a limit.

[0:34:46] So that's, and also I would also say,

[0:34:52] it becomes more or less of a focused need,

[0:34:57] depending on what you decide is the other options.

[0:35:04] Can I just, like I appreciate all that

[0:35:07] and I agree with you that like with the other things

[0:35:10] as we go through this, this will feel like

[0:35:12] less of a sticking point.

[0:35:14] But the chair asked specifically,

[0:35:17] is there a way for those properties get

[0:35:20] so to the conservation to hold density there

[0:35:23] so it can be transferred later?

[0:35:25] It wouldn't even, okay.

[0:35:26] And that's this, I think chair asked for a resistance.

[0:35:31] So I'm guessing.

[0:35:33] It's a great answer.

[0:35:34] Yeah.

[0:35:35] Thanks Sam.

[0:35:36] Yeah, I know where you're going.

[0:35:39] I guess, I mean, I'm like,

[0:35:43] I appreciate the, or I understand that there's a focus

[0:35:48] on trying to identify where it's appropriate and suitable.

[0:35:54] And I still kind of come back to this concept of,

[0:35:58] we have a really limited number of places

[0:35:59] that are gonna wanna do anything right now

[0:36:04] and probably for a hot minute.

[0:36:06] So my inclination is like, let's,

[0:36:10] I wanna throw out this whole process, let's focus on,

[0:36:13] The big thing is we know that we're doing triage.

[0:36:15] We know that we're way behind the ball

[0:36:17] on what is needed for safe and affordable housing

[0:36:21] on this island.

[0:36:21] And we know that there are people who are suffering

[0:36:23] and dying in inadequate housing.

[0:36:29] I'm less interested in long-term sort of like,

[0:36:31] well, let's develop one of the suitable areas.

[0:36:34] I know that we have lots of conversations.

[0:36:37] Let's get a black and white balance.

[0:36:38] I know it is.

[0:36:39] And I'm just sort of stating for the process in general.

[0:36:46] Let's make sure that the process that we're doing,

[0:36:48] and I think that lots of what's in this document supports

[0:36:51] this is making it easy and relatively easy and painless

[0:36:59] to do for support things happening and also put some

[0:37:04] reasonable limits on what can happen.

[0:37:09] Establish those and rework those so that they're

[0:37:11] framework that works better.

[0:37:15] Yeah, it's, yeah.

[0:37:18] So thank you for that, and thank you for that.

[0:37:21] As I said, I was kind of fiftivity on which way

[0:37:25] the, what was it called?

[0:37:29] The CSO.

[0:37:30] CSO's gonna-

[0:37:31] Sales.

[0:37:33] And really, what's gonna make my decision easier,

[0:37:37] I totally understand how you're forming

[0:37:41] a policy-directed density environment.

[0:37:47] But when the chair of the DCA finds me in the store,

[0:37:50] they say, hey, where are those densities gonna go?

[0:37:55] Because I'm used to that.

[0:37:57] When I say, hi, the chair of the DCA

[0:37:59] has been using this density bank as a tool

[0:38:03] for a long time, 15 years.

[0:38:09] So they're comfortable with them.

[0:38:11] They're not, we're not, we are not really comfortable

[0:38:15] with this idea that the policies will do the work.

[0:38:19] And so we need to, I need to be able to explain these policies

[0:38:24] and how they work.

[0:38:25] It's such a degree that I'm convinced that I'm going to be able

[0:38:28] to explain to the group that's been using this domain

[0:38:33] and they see it as a whole, that they love it.

[0:38:36] That's important for me.

[0:38:38] Let's move on to the density cap, which is policy to both.

[0:38:41] That is totally wrong in that.

[0:38:44] From the day one, A, we didn't even have the right number

[0:38:48] We just thought it was like, I don't know, close to a thousand, but we didn't really know

[0:38:55] what it was.

[0:38:56] And so that's been pro-life from day one.

[0:38:59] Last term, last local trustee, then the local trustee, they adopted the agricultural land

[0:39:05] for the period of opportunity.

[0:39:07] You'd have a second dwelling.

[0:39:09] Bang!

[0:39:10] We just added 128 potential dwellings.

[0:39:15] And so that throws out the fact that right off the bat our population velocity by close

[0:39:21] to 10%.

[0:39:22] The other interesting thing is back in the day when we were looking at our OCP and talking

[0:39:31] about housing, suites weren't considered densities.

[0:39:34] But I thought I was like surprised.

[0:39:36] But then I thought, okay, so it's in the house and you just take a portion of it out and

[0:39:41] you make that isolated living environment.

[0:39:44] So it's really just one density, but there's like more people.

[0:39:48] Well, not really more people because the house hasn't changed its size.

[0:39:51] So you can pack that house with six people or you can pass it.

[0:39:54] And it goes with four people and two people, two separate families.

[0:39:58] So that's why it's not a density.

[0:40:00] But I think it has a stuck into the calculation and entities.

[0:40:05] The streets have been looked at.

[0:40:07] Yeah, so the purpose is that this people.

[0:40:12] We'll get to the table.

[0:40:13] Yeah, so for the purposes of that,

[0:40:15] I guess the overall looking at how many units

[0:40:19] it is being considered just to give that perspective, I guess.

[0:40:25] But I mean, your point is a good one.

[0:40:28] I mean, the demographics within a unit can shift.

[0:40:33] Kids move out, basement suite turns into a rental.

[0:40:38] And instead of five people, you've got three people.

[0:40:41] You've got the original couple.

[0:40:43] So certainly those are considerations.

[0:40:45] I think we should hold that as a truth through this review.

[0:40:48] Suites are not going to affect density numbers.

[0:40:53] Yeah, that reflects conversations I've had too,

[0:40:55] where it was like, you know,

[0:40:57] who are concerned about, well, if you ask Secretary of

[0:40:59] Sweden, it's going to add all these people. I'm like, well,

[0:41:01] but if you think if you look demographically at what our

[0:41:03] islands population looks like, they're mostly we're 54% or

[0:41:08] it's probably more now, 54% over the age of 65. Those are not

[0:41:12] people who have a bunch of kids in the house, typically, not

[0:41:15] always, but typically. And so they may have had that house that

[0:41:19] was the whole family, but it's not anymore. And so, again,

[0:41:23] if they had three kids, and they have that now they have one

[0:41:26] renter, it's still fewer people living on the property, the

[0:41:29] water use is the same. And this is why, you know, the person I

[0:41:32] was talking to initially was like, very concerned about,

[0:41:34] right, this is going to consume much more water, so it can see

[0:41:36] much more material material, it's going to do all this stuff.

[0:41:38] And I'm like, Bob, not really. And even even when you talk

[0:41:43] about like, sort of traffic and infrastructure, you sell the

[0:41:45] island, yes, a renter is probably going to drive more

[0:41:48] than your average child, except for those couple years where

[0:41:51] they're a teenager, they're an older teenager, and they're

[0:41:53] driving all the time.

[0:41:54] So I don't know that it's a really compelling argument to say that it really is truly a new density.

[0:42:01] But I do appreciate that it's a valuable metric to have at the table because that table is very interesting.

[0:42:07] Yeah, and it's broken out absolutely.

[0:42:09] Yeah, so just coming back to policy 12.

[0:42:13] So again, this is something that the community since 2008 is really comfortable with.

[0:42:18] that gap on how a data can be more comfortable with that.

[0:42:22] So again, we need to be able to explain, well,

[0:42:26] Odyssey 12, even when it was created,

[0:42:29] wasn't accurate, hasn't surfaced yet.

[0:42:32] But what we're introducing is the idea

[0:42:34] that will service, will control.

[0:42:38] So these are just speaking notes

[0:42:40] or ways of explaining what we're doing

[0:42:41] that I will need as we get to that point.

[0:42:46] So yeah, policy 12, and present, perhaps we're ready to move Density Bank for this work.

[0:42:55] Very good.

[0:42:56] I'm pretty good.

[0:42:57] I'm pretty good.

[0:42:58] I'm pretty good at that.

[0:42:59] That's the effect.

[0:43:01] Okay.

[0:43:04] In terms of the order of things in the report, I knew that going from Density Bank, we have

[0:43:09] skipped over the seven.

[0:43:10] Yeah, so something was an interesting conversation.

[0:43:12] Yeah.

[0:43:13] And I wanted to lend a little bit more information on the analysis that we get into the conversation,

[0:43:17] in the conversation. So the one really big point is that the

[0:43:24] so the, the outlets put forward in this report is about

[0:43:29] subdivision for moving subdivision potential outright,

[0:43:33] and requiring reasonable results. So that derives the LTC of

[0:43:41] the day, the ability to evaluate the subdivision proposal ahead of time before closing the process.

[0:43:52] So with that in mind, there are some options that aren't identified here. So the one that is

[0:43:58] identified here is the idea of removing it and only allowing rezonings for very specific uses,

[0:44:06] and those are ones that have been identified here as community supporting community values. So that's

[0:44:11] the environmental first nations and housing.

[0:44:17] And I would also add to that community service,

[0:44:19] sometimes it might be recycling,

[0:44:21] a bit of land here and there.

[0:44:24] So under those conditions,

[0:44:26] there would be housing agreements,

[0:44:29] covenants and such to ensure that use would be that use,

[0:44:33] you know, in the case of first nations would be

[0:44:34] memorable and random understanding

[0:44:36] or something that we haven't explored yet.

[0:44:38] This is all new territory.

[0:44:39] So that's kind of the most extreme option, I guess, over here.

[0:44:43] The next would be rezoning for a community-bed,

[0:44:48] rezoning that includes a community benefit.

[0:44:50] So that's a kind of a density bonus situation.

[0:44:58] For example, Maine has a divinity policy

[0:45:01] that says that rezoning can be considered

[0:45:04] if they contribute these number of things.

[0:45:07] So that's where you would create that type of a policy and you would identify that.

[0:45:12] For example, in May's case, 50% of the area of the lots would be donated to those particular

[0:45:27] communities.

[0:45:28] That's a community benefit for conservation for watermelon.

[0:45:31] Conservation for watermelon or first nations.

[0:45:34] So that's the other one that's not identified here.

[0:45:39] Then there would be, you know,

[0:45:42] applying that to particular areas.

[0:45:44] Like there's so many different layers onto this.

[0:45:47] And, you know, we've been talking about 200 meters

[0:45:49] from the sea because there's for so many reasons

[0:45:53] and particularly on them because even, you know,

[0:45:55] in the highest bank area,

[0:45:57] that majority of that is in comonths plus CPA anyways.

[0:46:01] That's true.

[0:46:02] So it makes sense, you could also be very specific in that,

[0:46:06] in the area that you define for the most particular,

[0:46:09] you know, to either restrict something that's not together

[0:46:13] or to only allow particular uses.

[0:46:16] So that's the other consideration.

[0:46:19] And then the other would be to limit its own name,

[0:46:27] to limit something again,

[0:46:29] existing something taken away from areas

[0:46:32] in particular areas where again, it doesn't make sense to have.

[0:46:37] And when I say what it does make sense, based on.

[0:46:40] So why the rest?

[0:46:41] Well, the aspects, what I'm going to refer to here

[0:46:45] is the data that we have available to us.

[0:46:48] So the data that we have available to us, we have a lot of it.

[0:46:50] We have, you know, deep slopes, we have sensitive ecosystems.

[0:46:54] We've got cultural heritage.

[0:46:59] We've got art sites.

[0:47:01] We've got access to looking at the Comox maps, which is not public.

[0:47:06] So we have a lot of analysis that's available to us to be able to share and

[0:47:13] however you'd like to engage with that information.

[0:47:17] So and water, we've also got water.

[0:47:22] There was some good data related to water on the island as well.

[0:47:29] So there's a lot of data that can be used to identify areas where you may want to remove the ability to have them a lot.

[0:47:38] And, you know, I mean, the reason here to look at this closely is that, you know, from our perspectives, like when you look at them, you can't really figure out why they're there. Right.

[0:47:50] I mean, it's historical. It's based on some kind of historical decision making. Carving up lots.

[0:47:58] It is the highest form of impact, the land, because you've got private owners that aren't

[0:48:04] necessarily coordinating their uses, becomes their own use. And also, in today's market context,

[0:48:14] in the back in the day, and I talked to Kia back in the day, these small lots were the

[0:48:20] horrible houses. Those were the $3,000 lots in the 60s, right? So these days, they're not.

[0:48:26] Like, so it's in the context of what the needs of the island are that the area is affording those needs or those values in this context.

[0:48:42] So, yeah.

[0:48:44] And that data that you have access to, which would inform the decision whether it makes sense to

[0:48:50] sublet or not, would that not also be triggered if an application is put forward or sublet?

[0:48:56] So that's the reason. If you're going to be subleting,

[0:48:59] yeah, so if you know the route of subleting to rezoning, yes. And also if we're providing,

[0:49:07] because we provide our opinion on the referral, so we would be using that data as well. But in

[0:49:14] But in that case, we have a little less influence on the decision.

[0:49:25] Still you're forming the...

[0:49:26] We're actually forming the public...

[0:49:28] ...to make that possible.

[0:49:30] Yeah, informed decision.

[0:49:33] I guess the only other area with subdivision, there are certain people who are planning,

[0:49:39] and they've bought that property many years ago or whatever, to allow a child to subdivide

[0:49:46] off so that it finally gets secure. There's kind of like a family succession option to be an embedded issue.

[0:49:54] Oh, community benefits. And I appreciate that that, like the 946, which is an agricultural ability to carve off for a founding member, and you can't sell it for five years is a joke because what people did is they said, yeah, that's going to be for the child.

[0:50:13] five years and one day later, it's for sale.

[0:50:15] Yeah.

[0:50:16] So we all knew that that was, that was just so true.

[0:50:19] So my concern is that if we,

[0:50:22] if that was an option to say, well,

[0:50:24] you may be able to subdivide for a family member,

[0:50:28] but is there some way of controlling,

[0:50:31] can't control the next sale,

[0:50:34] but can you control how long they wait?

[0:50:36] Like you're speaking to,

[0:50:38] that would be a reason only,

[0:50:40] like a reason only from sub-trickling situations, right?

[0:50:42] that's where you want to have some control over the decision about whether it gets subdivided.

[0:50:48] Or you could say let's just say for the sake of where we say no more sub-d

[0:50:49] and then people come to the local trust committee and say well wait a minute what about my dream of doing this?

[0:51:00] And the local trust committee has an option to ignore that and allow that problem.

[0:51:08] I'm not sure that's getting into territory that I would have to.

[0:51:12] Yeah, that was the only thing about the pushback.

[0:51:17] We have different and I want to put my arguments so that yeah, the door isn't necessarily a lot.

[0:51:24] Yeah, it's good. I mean there'd be the reason why I would always be there. Yeah, so you still have the option and just it wouldn't be a guarantee.

[0:51:32] was before. So there would be an extra cost. Yeah, it's not a big

[0:51:34] cost. Yeah, when you consider what kind of a thought.

[0:51:39] And that's, see, that's how I approach the first bag and say,

[0:51:44] well, still have zoning options, which is much less than buying a

[0:51:50] piece of product for you. You're not working child and

[0:51:55] according to the bill. Yeah, that's on the page. At which

[0:52:01] point, then we would be looking at, I'm going to use the suitable VMS because it's the only

[0:52:06] way to calculate all those things. For this table, we'd look at that as whether that's,

[0:52:11] we're going to go with that. Yeah, I don't want to do that, but this is really not a suitable place

[0:52:16] for you to do that. So yeah, that's fair. And just a note on the suitable VMS analysis,

[0:52:21] we've got an amazing deal, like it's been, the tool now is amazing and I'd love to share it with you.

[0:52:26] Well, for sure.

[0:52:27] At some point.

[0:52:28] Yeah, good.

[0:52:29] It's for a follow-up.

[0:52:30] But yes, we have all of these mapping layers that will help to inform.

[0:52:34] So, I mean, and it may, you know, things change over time, right?

[0:52:38] For sure.

[0:52:39] The climate is changing.

[0:52:40] There may be a huge weather event, and suddenly you've lost half a bank.

[0:52:44] Yeah.

[0:52:45] So, if you've got your, but you've got subdivision potential in there, and there are, there

[0:52:49] is.

[0:52:50] There is a lot of subdivision potential in the smaller lot, in the R1 area.

[0:52:55] along the waterfront, right?

[0:52:57] So then you're leaving the subdivision potential in there

[0:53:00] in an area that is dangerous for people to be living, period,

[0:53:05] but to be in the inland market to live separately.

[0:53:10] So I'm leading you to that 200 year set,

[0:53:16] you know, border kind of decided through conversations

[0:53:20] with First Nations, they seem comfortable,

[0:53:22] that seems like a reasonable start,

[0:53:25] to restrict subject issues from there.

[0:53:29] And you say there's always the opportunity

[0:53:31] to in which our poll is probably

[0:53:33] is that no loss there so.

[0:53:35] Yeah, well, if you build that in,

[0:53:38] so I mean, so what I think I'm hearing from you

[0:53:40] is to remove the outright such a visible potential

[0:53:44] that 200 meters from the water

[0:53:47] and that would include,

[0:53:49] and in looking at that,

[0:53:51] we would look at the properties

[0:53:52] and we'd have to identify like those

[0:53:54] that are 50% of the things that are some that are what have you

[0:53:58] or those that are essentially along with the court.

[0:54:01] And so what I think you're suggesting

[0:54:04] is that you would remove that,

[0:54:05] but allow it up for rezoning

[0:54:06] so that there's an ability to examine,

[0:54:10] you know, whether it's a viable option.

[0:54:13] I think that's the part you made, right?

[0:54:16] Taking it away, but we haven't taken,

[0:54:17] there's not a lot.

[0:54:19] Right, like it's not locked, yeah.

[0:54:21] It's not locked.

[0:54:22] Yeah.

[0:54:24] Well, I mean, I'm pretty similar. And obviously, I mean, 150 or so additional lots 90 of those fall within that 200 meter see depending on the specifics.

[0:54:41] specifics. My inclination was to say that we remove it all. I think it's easier in terms of

[0:54:52] the non-nones here, but I think it's, to me, it seems more and more appropriate to do that

[0:54:58] sort of across the whole code and just make that a case. Then it takes less, there's going to be

[0:55:07] less sense of, you know, so-and-so is 49% out of it and now suddenly they feel like they're

[0:55:15] being persecuted. I think it's easier if we bring that down across the board and say,

[0:55:19] and then yeah, I mean my understanding and again these are complicated things and I'm still wrapping

[0:55:25] my head around how this, how long-term policy like this changes things but from my understanding

[0:55:33] of this, you know, making this process go through rezoning means that it comes to this table. And

[0:55:39] and yes, I mean, and to be clear, Super11, I think it's a great concept. I think that a lot of the

[0:55:46] data that we had the last time I saw it was not good. And I was like, I can't use this until...

[0:55:53] That's great. I'm not going to get...

[0:55:54] We could have time to do that.

[0:55:56] I'm not going to say anything.

[0:55:58] I'm just trying to get at it.

[0:56:04] Lots of things are going to go into lots of considerations and considerations of data that you cannot have on your table.

[0:56:10] Like the fact that we might know these people is going to be a part of any decision that an LPC makes about that sort of stuff.

[0:56:16] And I am more comfortable with that being something that comes through a local trust committee table than something that's solely enhanced by the administrator.

[0:56:24] And I would rather see that come through.

[0:56:27] We are for better or worse, whether people like it or.

[0:56:30] I believe that the Islands Trust and the local trust committee

[0:56:35] are better placed to make those kinds of decisions.

[0:56:38] And it also puts the onus on people at this table

[0:56:41] to be fair minded and progressive and willing to open mind

[0:56:45] to work with those people in those moments.

[0:56:47] But I think that we should be elevating this table

[0:56:50] to make those calls as opposed to,

[0:56:54] and I think that should apply across the island.

[0:56:56] I don't particularly,

[0:56:58] I, the area of potential for the first nations

[0:57:03] is just one component of the reasons

[0:57:06] why we might want to include some.

[0:57:09] There's lots of other things that really concern me.

[0:57:12] Well, and it's DPAs and other areas,

[0:57:14] all sorts of those stuff, historical,

[0:57:16] historical value of various areas of properties.

[0:57:20] There's lots of things that fall into that.

[0:57:22] I think it, to me, it strikes me as more ethical

[0:57:25] to do it across the board.

[0:57:27] And also I think it speaks more,

[0:57:28] it puts a little bit more air in our lungs

[0:57:32] when we make this policy go forward

[0:57:35] if we do it with our whole throat,

[0:57:37] as opposed to saying, okay, we're just gonna roll it out

[0:57:40] with this part because this is part we're worried about.

[0:57:43] All of it is important, the whole island is important.

[0:57:46] And we should be treating subdivision with them in my mind.

[0:57:55] Okay.

[0:57:56] So if I'm hearing, I think there's agreement on the idea of removing the outright permitted subdivision and moving to a subdetermined to rezoning.

[0:58:14] So what we'll do is we'll come back with criteria related to the rezoning.

[0:58:20] Yeah, I mean, you talk a bit about criteria here.

[0:58:25] Yeah.

[0:58:26] Anyways, I know the things, the questions and the recommended reasons for that all are

[0:58:33] satisfactory.

[0:58:34] Like talking about the creation of parks, heritage protection, development of housing

[0:58:41] things, which is already how things are in the community service.

[0:58:45] And those are the reasons that it would be important to do that.

[0:58:51] So there were to be a community benefit for them.

[0:58:54] Yeah, there's some sort of services being created.

[0:58:56] So for example, I mean, we know,

[0:58:57] and I know we're gonna talk about this later,

[0:58:59] but the work shared, you know,

[0:59:00] there's this bit that's being cowed off

[0:59:03] to do a, to some housing hopefully,

[0:59:05] and then there's also this possible long-term possibility

[0:59:08] for it to be more community housing, long-term.

[0:59:11] That's one thing, but we're still gonna need a work share.

[0:59:14] So to have the ability to subdivide,

[0:59:17] to create a new work share in 10 years

[0:59:20] would be a thing that we're going to need.

[0:59:24] We need a place to park, graders and snowflowers.

[0:59:29] So yeah.

[0:59:31] And advertising those community benefits.

[0:59:33] Yeah.

[0:59:34] And that falls.

[0:59:35] Yeah.

[0:59:35] Yeah, so discussion.

[0:59:37] So are you requiring a community benefit with the rezoning?

[0:59:41] No, I mean, I think it,

[0:59:43] well, this was a list of potential reasons

[0:59:47] to go permit a rezoning.

[0:59:48] Yeah.

[0:59:50] that there are other sub-dimissions for redesigning,

[0:59:53] that that list of criteria to me was satisfactory.

[0:59:56] There was nothing else that was like,

[0:59:58] there's a reason we should write this.

[1:00:00] Okay, yeah. And then, so there is the ability to permit for those things outright.

[1:00:12] Permit some of those outright without resorting. We can explore with that policy with the right to turn.

[1:00:18] And then what the rezoning criteria for the things that are not that.

[1:00:22] That does address one of the recommendations from the housing plan, which I think hit a little less bureaucratic.

[1:00:28] Yeah, that's the point is that to make it a little easier for the housing organizations.

[1:00:33] Okay, yeah.

[1:00:34] Well, let's read.

[1:00:38] That's great.

[1:00:52] So then, do we need to. So, we're going through is the density cap.

[1:00:58] Yeah, so you decided to do away with the density cap without the.

[1:01:07] But I would ask you for the community information

[1:01:11] that you've received, the adoption of these things,

[1:01:14] that we take some time to explain

[1:01:16] how the current fencing path is not,

[1:01:22] doesn't make any sense for a number of reasons.

[1:01:25] So people can really like, oh, okay,

[1:01:27] so that really didn't make, wasn't based in reality.

[1:01:30] That's important to you.

[1:01:31] So that drop that seed in the dirt

[1:01:33] and then come back with the policies

[1:01:35] that will affect the same results more intelligently.

[1:01:45] So yes, base hands, yes.

[1:01:47] So there's a number of,

[1:01:50] this next section is really responding

[1:01:53] to the community's concerns around increasing

[1:01:58] permitted units and expanding beyond what's existing

[1:02:08] If you've got the density because the density cap is sort of seen as this way of keeping things that one of the interesting things about Denman's land use is that there are multiple units permitted on in R1 and R2.

[1:02:28] R2. So R1 is one unit per one hectare. R2 is one unit per four hectare. So when you've

[1:02:37] got the larger loss, there's like many, many units that can be permitted. So these recommendations

[1:02:45] look at the consideration of reducing those numbers. If you're wanting to do kind of like a

[1:02:52] 19 permitted density at a similar level. And that's what that chart, that chart attachment

[1:03:02] one is about is looking at if you were to like what does it look like when you were there

[1:03:09] like when you were able to produce the amount of units permitted in some of the things where

[1:03:14] there's many units permitted. It's also looking at where it may make sense to allow a little

[1:03:21] with more flexibility. And so this actually took quite some detailed analysis looking at the maps,

[1:03:27] looking at all the criteria, things that have been discussed already, proximity to the village,

[1:03:32] looking at some of the things that have come out in a biomedic NPC, allowing secondary suites

[1:03:38] closer to the village and that sort of thing, looking at the water situation. So that's where

[1:03:46] there are some things in here that either reduce or increase by a little bit. So that's my overall

[1:03:55] for here for this. And then we can like... Just to be clear, are we looking at attachment below?

[1:04:02] Yeah, attachment four is the card. Yeah. So that's a good reference because we kind of have

[1:04:09] conversation about each one here and because those are numbers are all reflected in this chart.

[1:04:15] And what was really interesting for me actually,

[1:04:18] because I was like, does this make sense to do this?

[1:04:22] What does it look like at the end?

[1:04:23] Is it actually going to create more?

[1:04:24] Is it going to create less in the end?

[1:04:26] And you can see, if you went forward,

[1:04:30] it changes the actual total amount

[1:04:32] of number of dwellings is less, or very close at least.

[1:04:36] Right?

[1:04:37] So yeah.

[1:04:40] For the sake of simplicity, because suites don't count,

[1:04:44] Why don't they just remove what was called?

[1:04:47] I mean, a real tough time making the map work.

[1:04:50] Yeah, so that's spreadsheet, right?

[1:04:52] So the X axis and the Y axis should be able to add up and say, you know, if they don't.

[1:04:58] But it's kind of confused what you're talking about.

[1:05:00] So if you take the potential secondary suites away from each, it's 500 from...

[1:05:06] Yeah, but essentially they don't count.

[1:05:09] Yeah.

[1:05:10] Why confuse the chart?

[1:05:11] Because otherwise we'll have people going all over the place.

[1:05:13] Yeah, totally. What about those 500? Yeah, so then the changes in the order of magnitude is an

[1:05:19] anything really kind of like kind of somewhat. Yeah, pretty close. Yeah, so

[1:05:25] yeah, so that's it. I think it's an easy thing to do in this circumstance. And then because in some

[1:05:32] cases you're adding potential like in some of these recommendations about the values of a few

[1:05:37] additional options for secondary units. But let's move through it and see what your thoughts are.

[1:05:47] So the first one is about R2 limitations. So

[1:05:55] oh sorry it's number 14 of the report.

[1:06:06] The question here is whether you want to make it as in to reduce the amount

[1:06:12] of dwellings that can be permitted on a lot, a certain number or whatever, you want to continue

[1:06:20] to support what exists. Keeping in mind that if the units are already built, they get

[1:06:28] legal non-conforming protection. So yeah, so that's been the big decision with both

[1:06:35] the rural residential R1 and R2 limitations.

[1:06:44] So what's being suggested for R2

[1:06:47] is that there's a limitation to five per property.

[1:06:51] To four.

[1:06:52] Yeah, sorry, to four.

[1:06:53] Yeah, four per lot.

[1:06:55] So that would be limited to R2 properties that have 48.

[1:07:04] Yeah, so it's one per four, so 16, oh, hectors.

[1:07:08] Yeah, sorry.

[1:07:09] Sorry, I'm on the paper first.

[1:07:12] You're a connector person.

[1:07:14] Sorry about that.

[1:07:17] We just collectively decided that we're going to start talking in metric.

[1:07:20] I know you.

[1:07:21] But I can teach you that says I am old.

[1:07:24] And that's just no.

[1:07:26] Yeah, I can't think of the math right now.

[1:07:28] But if I can, can I, can I, can I talk in vectors?

[1:07:31] Yeah, that's true.

[1:07:32] Four vectors.

[1:07:33] So that would, that would mean properties that are 16.

[1:07:36] Or above.

[1:07:37] you would have a map passable from forward well into forward.

[1:07:40] And now it's just a-

[1:07:43] There's five properties that would be impacted.

[1:07:44] Yeah.

[1:07:45] Yeah.

[1:07:49] Yeah, I mean they may very well already have those.

[1:07:52] When we look at the map, we only get the ones that are known.

[1:07:58] We successfully know the site.

[1:08:02] One and a third of it's named.

[1:08:04] On those five properties, it don't

[1:08:06] look like they've been expended beyond.

[1:08:08] But it seems a reasonable suggestion to our team.

[1:08:13] Unless we have a tremendous pushback, which I don't really anticipate seems a reasonable.

[1:08:17] I mean, it's really just by a property owners.

[1:08:21] Yeah. Yeah.

[1:08:27] Well, and if we're allowing for this, don't let's still allow this for other things.

[1:08:31] Right. So yeah.

[1:08:33] And later on, when we talk about the secondary states, the current.

[1:08:38] Yeah. So the current.

[1:08:39] So, I'm going to go ahead and turn it off.

[1:08:43] OCP and there's, it was really hard to understand what is actually allowed in terms of secondary suites on R2, because you read it one way.

[1:08:55] And it looks like you're only allowed one secondary suite on R2 so only one.

[1:09:00] This will go on secondary suite that's the way to read. So, we're sort of correcting that by putting that secondary unit so essentially debate.

[1:09:11] I think so.

[1:09:12] I think so.

[1:09:13] I think so.

[1:09:14] I think so.

[1:09:15] So, so I want a similar thing.

[1:09:18] 50.

[1:09:19] I wasn't around when they decided that he could have the size of the large Erlang mark.

[1:09:34] And I don't really think that I really...

[1:09:39] Yeah, with the art, is there all along with the rate?

[1:09:44] I mean, that's, and that's also happens to be the area of, uh, for the most dark potential.

[1:09:51] Like, I mean, there's thousands, you know, as we know, there's thousands of years of history.

[1:09:56] So it's like humans of throughout time.

[1:09:59] You want to be close to the water.

[1:10:01] Yeah.

[1:10:01] So, um, except now with the potential increase in water level, this idea of being on water

[1:10:09] So those of us that are watching the results of our windows.

[1:10:16] Yeah. I wouldn't want to be there.

[1:10:20] I would.

[1:10:22] But anyway.

[1:10:23] Yeah. Like, hi, my board, honestly.

[1:10:26] But yeah, so here it's again, it's recommending a reduction.

[1:10:31] I suggested two in here and you can go down to just one.

[1:10:35] It's an alternative.

[1:10:38] Yeah.

[1:10:39] Yeah, so that was a question that was for you.

[1:10:52] I think my inclination had been to go with a stronger limitation.

[1:10:58] And just, I think that is an area that we should be discouraging.

[1:11:03] Like we should say, yes, it's a level place to be.

[1:11:06] Most of the densely packed areas of the island are along the coast.

[1:11:12] lots of slices of coastline.

[1:11:15] I think we should maybe be discerning thoughts

[1:11:17] and development upon those.

[1:11:22] So that was my inclination on reading this.

[1:11:25] And again, I was going with the sort of

[1:11:35] ultra-big recommendation of stronger for all our work.

[1:11:40] Because it's not just about shoreline protection,

[1:11:43] it's not just about intellectual detention for me.

[1:11:46] It's, there's a general, I mean,

[1:11:48] R1 is supposed to be that residential element.

[1:11:54] That was my, and knowing that we're getting

[1:11:56] with other changes that are coming further in this document,

[1:11:58] like there are potentials for other people

[1:12:00] to stay within those places,

[1:12:02] but like building more buildings in those areas

[1:12:05] seems like a fortress.

[1:12:07] That was my inclination, but I wanted to-

[1:12:09] Yeah, I'm not comfortable with that point.

[1:12:13] I'd rather go with a recommended option

[1:12:15] I'm quite sure those are the guardies.

[1:12:20] And they did. Yeah, yeah. No, that's fine with me. I didn't. This was not a strongly held.

[1:12:26] If people already exist, they would be legal law. Yeah, I realize that. But that also happens.

[1:12:31] So it also includes.

[1:12:34] Doesn't feel the same.

[1:12:37] Yeah. Okay, so that's the recommendation.

[1:12:42] With the recommendation.

[1:12:43] Okay, so the next one is changed from ARRI to world-positive. So this is actually very,

[1:12:52] this was a very interesting one for me. Because you know, I did deep dive into the maps and trying to

[1:12:59] understand why things are doing the way they are. And in this case, it's not really, I mean,

[1:13:05] it's not clear from zoning why it exists, because the uses are allowed. I mean,

[1:13:12] there's a lot of forestry and there's a lot of agriculture on the island. When you're on a land, it starts to make sense.

[1:13:20] You know, when I was on one of the R1 properties, they're all, these are all on the map on a,

[1:13:31] yeah, for the, a platform tree identifies the property that would be affected by this.

[1:13:41] So I was looking at it, so if you see like RE,

[1:13:45] um, you got it, Matt? Yeah, so. So I was looking at, there's um,

[1:13:53] um, the RE tower to, uh, um, straight up, um, where there is, uh, where there's a, uh,

[1:14:07] essentially for additional loss but it's not, or additional bond but it's not on the

[1:14:12] the boundaries of the sea, you know, where their neighbors are allowed to have, neighbors are

[1:14:18] allowed to have R1. So you can see on that patch there there's R2 and there's even R1

[1:14:24] like right next to them. So when I was on the land there, that more inland fortune there,

[1:14:31] understanding the history of dogs that I did in mining and then when you see,

[1:14:34] you can kind of get like, you know, they're probably pulling out the trees and taking them down to the shoreline.

[1:14:44] I don't have evidence of it, but when you look at it, that just makes sense.

[1:14:50] And on the other side of the island, it's actually, I couldn't figure out a story for that.

[1:14:55] I don't know why that exists in RE, but it does make sense to consider that zoning that

[1:15:03] is like, that makes sense with the rest of the OCP and the minespile.

[1:15:11] So in this case, what I'm recommending is there is the shift from R2 to RE, but where the

[1:15:23] are within that 200 meter that we're not going to allow the R2 specific

[1:15:31] something to be additional as well as because we are looking at this as an area

[1:15:36] we don't want to add for. So basically what you've got here is like there's a

[1:15:43] potential of adding three additional dwellings in an area and I would also mention that

[1:15:47] That area in the blue there, that is plentiful water.

[1:15:51] In fact, our freshwater specialist said,

[1:15:56] you're going to build anywhere, that's the place to build.

[1:15:59] Like just from a water perspective, right?

[1:16:01] So any question you might have about that.

[1:16:04] So those would be spots over there, that orange and pink would be specific.

[1:16:09] Yeah, so in that case, it would be R2, the orange, the pink would be R2,

[1:16:16] but it would be just allowed to have existing what it has,

[1:16:19] but it would be identified as residential.

[1:16:21] And then the other case, because that is split zone,

[1:16:26] so the origin there is actually only,

[1:16:29] it's part of that larger-

[1:16:30] Single bot, isn't it?

[1:16:32] The single bot, so that little sort of large,

[1:16:34] large, big, yellow shape, that's part of that bot,

[1:16:36] and it is zoned agricultural.

[1:16:39] So the idea would be-

[1:16:41] That's right.

[1:16:42] Yeah, that would just be agricultural with a bit of reason special agricultural so we're not removing what otherwise be allowed that one unit in our

[1:16:57] Make sense. Yeah, my, my notes were just go with what staff.

[1:17:05] I don't know how those are the zone lots managed to slip through the last three years.

[1:17:16] It's really complex thing and actually the conversation with our regional planning manager Kajima, he was like, that's kind of something we would have added to a general update of the lunch.

[1:17:26] David Marlin might have been a producer at the time,

[1:17:30] but if you can remember every area.

[1:17:33] Very rich, I think, for some talk.

[1:17:35] So it doesn't really matter.

[1:17:37] We're moving ahead, and that makes sense.

[1:17:41] Yeah, keep your focus.

[1:17:42] Okay, moving on.

[1:17:46] Do we want to take a break at any point here?

[1:17:49] 4-11-20.

[1:17:50] So do you want to move from lunch?

[1:17:53] Okay, so the next one is this, is this the one that, oh no that was changed.

[1:18:12] Oh, no, that was changed.

[1:18:15] Oh, yeah.

[1:18:16] So this is really just about allowing an individual, allowing housing in the institutional building.

[1:18:22] And I think perhaps I'm conversating about this is where like what's in the institution,

[1:18:26] things like the school.

[1:18:27] And we've got this great example on Main Island where the community rallied and built a house

[1:18:35] for the principal.

[1:18:36] So right now, this is the.

[1:18:39] This one I think is specific to the Works Yard site.

[1:18:43] So that's your job.

[1:18:45] Sorry.

[1:18:45] That's OK.

[1:18:47] So you think Sam had mentioned this.

[1:18:51] So this is the Works Yard site right now.

[1:18:54] And a portion of it is already seeing the rezoning

[1:18:56] subdivision and subdivision for a portion of that.

[1:19:00] And then there's the remainder portion

[1:19:03] that still functions with the Works Yard with the lease

[1:19:06] in place for approximately 13 more years.

[1:19:10] No land use designation is currently support residential

[1:19:13] use for long-term affordable housing on this parcel.

[1:19:17] And so the owner is interested in having the,

[1:19:25] well, they're interested in rezoning,

[1:19:26] but whether that makes sense to rezone something

[1:19:30] and then sort of be helped for 13 plus years,

[1:19:34] or whether it makes sense to just change the OCP land use designation as sort of a future

[1:19:41] forward focus of what this land is going to be designated for and then when the time comes in

[1:19:47] 13 or 15 years and they want to rezone it would be a much simpler process because the OCP

[1:19:53] designation would already signal that this is...

[1:19:56] Yeah, I think that makes sense.

[1:19:58] And then the specific

[1:20:00] criteria and site plans and all of that would come in at the rezoning stage, which would be

[1:20:06] further down the road. So that has been, I think we've had a presentation last LTC meeting about

[1:20:14] this idea and whether the LTC is interested in incorporating that into this housing review

[1:20:21] project and changing the OCP designation now or whether you just want to move the OCP and

[1:20:27] and led us by law to the future.

[1:20:29] Seems to fit with the work we're doing.

[1:20:32] I think housing is an allow use

[1:20:35] in the institution's own properties.

[1:20:36] So that's a bit downside.

[1:20:41] That's like the downside at all.

[1:20:43] There isn't really a downside.

[1:20:46] Aside from like the suitability,

[1:20:49] just that we don't know the suitability.

[1:20:51] That would come into the resumption.

[1:20:51] But that would come in at the resumption.

[1:20:54] You should amend the NCPH to make that an easier part

[1:20:58] That was also making like, yeah, sorry.

[1:21:05] That made a lot of sense.

[1:21:13] Right. So we went along.

[1:21:16] To secondary.

[1:21:19] So here, the definitions are really important here.

[1:21:24] One, because we're trying to align.

[1:21:27] With the definition of province.

[1:21:32] Government's government's government's government's government's

[1:21:35] government's government's government's government's government's

[1:21:37] the

[1:21:39] government

[1:21:41] but also because we're referring to secondary dwelling unit.

[1:21:47] So,

[1:21:49] dwelling unit is basically your room in the house.

[1:21:53] So the proposed new ones, secondary dwelling unit,

[1:21:57] referring to being additional unit,

[1:22:01] in addition to your principal unit,

[1:22:03] principle unit, which could be a secondary suite inside your

[1:22:08] principle unit, or it could be a detached secondary unit. So the

[1:22:14] reason why this is important is that if you want to, if you want,

[1:22:22] if you want to make it the system to allow one or either or it

[1:22:29] makes it sort of cleaner on the same page.

[1:22:34] So moving through, the very first step with all of this

[1:22:38] is removing the TUP for the detached secondary.

[1:22:42] That's kind of necessary to engage with the conversation.

[1:22:45] You don't want this.

[1:22:51] So the next one is to permit secondary suites

[1:22:53] in all principal dwelling units in R2.

[1:22:56] So we kind of touched on this a little bit.

[1:22:59] That's where you might be removing number of units

[1:23:03] who are allowing the second, third suite.

[1:23:06] And for the reasons you've already identified,

[1:23:10] it's whatever we may or may not add for that space.

[1:23:16] But did I hear you saying in just an R2 or also?

[1:23:22] So we're just talking about R2 right now.

[1:23:23] Okay.

[1:23:24] And what they do is they say,

[1:23:25] this is confusing me as I was going through it

[1:23:27] because it is in sections where it's like,

[1:23:29] was like, well, just did this thing. And then I turned the page and I was like, Oh, okay.

[1:23:32] It's all just, yeah,

[1:23:33] let's just go through it all. So I'm going to say just one thing I really, yeah, yeah,

[1:23:37] he skipped here. So, um, the one thing that I flagged with sector unit definition, okay. Um,

[1:23:45] just, there was just, I know, just sort of comparing and contrasting. Yeah. Um, and having

[1:23:50] lived in a place, uh, which did not necessarily have a bathroom inside the house. And so I

[1:23:57] I understand this may be a broader definition we're using across the self-continent with its own kitchen bathroom.

[1:24:02] I think you're a boiling unit. Do you want us to revisit the definition?

[1:24:05] Yeah, just really... I just... I have to be quite a bit too fast.

[1:24:09] So that's the existing definition? Is something that one?

[1:24:13] That's the proposed definition.

[1:24:16] The proposed definition of boiling is it?

[1:24:19] Our existing...

[1:24:21] Oh, with the...

[1:24:22] Does not have that...

[1:24:23] And it's just...

[1:24:24] The same thing, Terry.

[1:24:25] I'm probably splitting hairs here, but like not everybody has a, especially the secondary

[1:24:31] thing.

[1:24:32] There may be a communal that has that's used, I think if we say it as secondary dwelling

[1:24:36] unit needs to have a choice.

[1:24:38] And even like we talk about, I quite liked the broad and relatively like the dwelling

[1:24:46] unit definition that we have from before.

[1:24:50] And I recognize we need to do something that's a little standardized, but it's definitely

[1:24:54] value in that. I just, it was a little bit overly prescriptive for me, and just having

[1:25:01] lived in places where there wasn't necessarily a single toilet contained within a place that I lived.

[1:25:08] Yeah, I think that's a really good point.

[1:25:10] That may be a product, especially if we're talking about places which are going to have to be

[1:25:15] We can maybe, we'll do a specific.

[1:25:21] Sure.

[1:25:22] Or in-house or in-house or what?

[1:25:25] Yeah, that's, that's a very good, like,

[1:25:28] very familiar with that arrangement here in Funx Island.

[1:25:34] It's awesome.

[1:25:35] It was fun that integrates that particular funx.

[1:25:38] I think it's perfect.

[1:25:40] Okay, so definition. Okay, so now we're at secondary suite with no principal, no hate,

[1:25:53] we said yes to that. Okay, so here's where we go to one secondary. Well, like, so this

[1:26:00] is this is where this is the question of where they like allowing a secondary. So right now,

[1:26:06] This is about allowing one or the other, right?

[1:26:10] So you can decide with teeth to allow the secondary suite

[1:26:15] or a cat.

[1:26:19] So in the areas where the secondary suites are currently

[1:26:25] permitted in our two agriculture and forestry,

[1:26:31] and so we're not going to talk about creating eliminated that.

[1:26:35] And so in this case, it's allowing that flexibility

[1:26:40] to have that, if you're not having a secondary unit,

[1:26:44] then maybe you're having another separate unit,

[1:26:49] a small unit, approximately to your house

[1:26:52] that sort of functions like a secondary unit.

[1:26:56] So the option, yeah, so that's what the option is.

[1:27:01] So per principal dwelling unit in R2.

[1:27:07] So I've suggested here the proposal of R2

[1:27:12] that are less than four actors, assuming that,

[1:27:15] because in the R2, the library already left

[1:27:17] up to four now, right?

[1:27:20] So this would allow a secondary suite or a smaller unit,

[1:27:27] which would be defined in size,

[1:27:29] small size or for a maximum for two.

[1:27:35] On the forestry lots, they were only allowed to have

[1:27:37] one principal and one secondary unit, a secondary suite.

[1:27:43] So that would allow them to have that little cabin or

[1:27:48] what have you, you know,

[1:27:49] allow them to have the tiny house or what have you.

[1:27:53] And we'll talk about R18,

[1:27:58] which is this close to the village area,

[1:28:02] so that could be an option as well to have either or.

[1:28:06] So this is really the question is,

[1:28:08] you can just decide whether you allow these

[1:28:12] in these areas to have both a secondary suite

[1:28:14] and an additional unit within a smaller size

[1:28:20] or one quarterly, I mean, that's what this is about.

[1:28:23] And we're talking BR2s and we're talking four-heater.

[1:28:26] We're talking that BR2s under four-heater

[1:28:28] So basically what we're talking about are the places where you're currently only allowed

[1:28:33] to have your principal dwelling and the secondary suite.

[1:28:37] Well I think in those smaller R2 lots they're less than flooring.

[1:28:43] It should be an old apple.

[1:28:46] Because they're still, there's no easy pea-dee.

[1:28:48] They're just slightly smaller.

[1:28:51] There's still a big chunk of land, obsolete handles to the apartment, and the fact that

[1:28:57] And because we've already talked about suites not impacting density, they're really just repurposing existing rooms in the principal dwelling, not really getting much.

[1:29:09] It doesn't like the idea of limiting that secondary dwelling that detached secondary dwelling to the present.

[1:29:16] where people try to remember what to do.

[1:29:19] Yeah, so the...

[1:29:20] Square meters which...

[1:29:21] The consideration here, yeah, it's perfect.

[1:29:24] So the consideration here is that you're limiting the overall impact on the lot.

[1:29:29] So it's either you're looking at a combined...

[1:29:32] I think the combined area, rather than being specific to that section.

[1:29:36] Yeah, so the 1000 is where there is a currently existing house.

[1:29:40] So say you've got a larger house and somebody wants to build a small...

[1:29:44] What's...

[1:29:44] check to care for. But I think it would be over the combined.

[1:29:50] They're already over the combined limits, providing the

[1:29:52] opportunity for that smaller unit.

[1:29:55] That makes sense.

[1:29:57] And the two are not mutually exclusive.

[1:30:03] Again, I wouldn't make this. This is just my feeling. I

[1:30:06] wouldn't make the distinction whether it's if it's an R2,

[1:30:09] it's an R2, it's a small R2 or it's a big R2. It's an R2.

[1:30:12] they would have a suite and the work you can have both.

[1:30:16] Well, the question is, is it both or is it and or?

[1:30:19] It's both, for me.

[1:30:21] Yeah, I think, I mean, given that we've talked about suites in the way that it was just mentioned,

[1:30:27] I don't think we should be, we've already said that we don't think they

[1:30:34] make an appreciable difference in terms of the impact of the potential use of the building anyways.

[1:30:38] So, okay. And then the one other piece of this is that the location close to the principal dwelling.

[1:30:52] That's in there again with consideration of the limiting impact of the

[1:30:58] separate units. That 60 meters is actually from straight from your

[1:31:03] existing CP. But the one that you've added is that you've got the secondary dwelling,

[1:31:09] the detached secondary dwelling hooked up to the principal dwelling that's

[1:31:14] subject and that's different than our current.

[1:31:18] Now, what's going to happen?

[1:31:22] Why? Because that's about limiting the impact. I mean, I guess if you've got a really tiny

[1:31:26] septic system, you have to build a bigger one. So that may

[1:31:30] shoot that ration on.

[1:31:33] I think it's impractical. If you're in the maximum distance of 60 meters from now, you've got a lot of typing that you've

[1:31:38] that are built and you know I mean the little building, little secondary welding that may

[1:31:45] choose to just use the cistern and be completely not dependent on the product, which is even

[1:31:50] better.

[1:31:51] Right, yeah.

[1:31:52] Whereas you don't have that option with this particular...

[1:31:54] Well you, I mean that could be a, well it's not necessarily, I guess shared weld, it's

[1:31:59] that's about not punching in other home litigrams for your smaller unit that there's a different

[1:32:06] Yeah, the the the yeah so the question for me is also just getting a really prescriptive on that is that is that the demands of the train and different parts of the island are just so extreme.

[1:32:19] But yeah, I can go from you can be one place where it might be all sand and dirt and everything's fine gravy and you can do whatever you want.

[1:32:26] that place might be right on top of a bridge somewhere,

[1:32:28] and you can't have, like if you build your primary house

[1:32:31] right on the edge of a bridge in a cliff,

[1:32:33] you're looking out over everything else,

[1:32:35] there may be nowhere safe to put that secondary door

[1:32:37] and it would be legal.

[1:32:39] I don't necessarily need to put that high tonight.

[1:32:41] It's important in a game, like that, you know,

[1:32:45] a good plan is being made for water and sewer

[1:32:47] to get it slated.

[1:32:48] But if we limit it hard on that,

[1:32:51] then we want to preclude it from people

[1:32:54] otherwise would be entitled to the chemo.

[1:32:56] But I think it's intersexual actually also because like, how to health, you know, if they say you have to have two-septic systems,

[1:33:04] or like if you have one well, sort of C2L, that's a water system.

[1:33:08] Yeah, it's true.

[1:33:09] So that really, really makes it smaller and difficult for somebody.

[1:33:13] Yeah.

[1:33:14] So...

[1:33:15] And I was going to address the impact on the environment.

[1:33:18] We're trying to address that by reducing the lot coverage percentage.

[1:33:21] So that's that's the slip.

[1:33:23] Archimin say, well, we are we're doing our best.

[1:33:26] Yeah, yeah, but I understand where you're coming from,

[1:33:30] but I really do think that San Jose are probably there.

[1:33:34] I think there's a really good point.

[1:33:35] Yeah, I understand the concept of planning,

[1:33:37] but also just yeah, totally makes sense.

[1:33:40] And we're dealing with so few relatively few properties.

[1:33:44] Yeah, I know this is a you know,

[1:33:46] with the traditional me and you're obviously looking at lots of

[1:33:48] lots of islands, but certainly for this particular,

[1:33:53] what these rules are designed to govern

[1:33:55] is relatively small number of places

[1:33:58] which are undergoing a relatively slow rate of change.

[1:34:01] I think it's not crazy for us to like take our time

[1:34:03] and work out what works best for the property

[1:34:07] on a one by one.

[1:34:08] It's much safer to really encourage rainwater catchment.

[1:34:12] Absolutely, like lots of other things.

[1:34:13] Yeah, absolutely.

[1:34:15] So what I'm hearing is remove that bullet, that box,

[1:34:19] shift that, yeah.

[1:34:20] Yeah.

[1:34:21] Yeah.

[1:34:22] One little thing, you've got to be careful with that sign,

[1:34:25] that radical sign, you've got to re-book

[1:34:27] just in your document.

[1:34:30] Oh, yeah, sometimes I do that.

[1:34:31] Thank you.

[1:34:32] I'll make sure, because you talked about it,

[1:34:34] it'll be in a minute.

[1:34:35] Yeah.

[1:34:37] There were a couple of little typos for me,

[1:34:39] most of them learned what I was finding.

[1:34:41] You can tell the title of the experience.

[1:34:42] But there were a couple where I was like, is this,

[1:34:44] and it's like, oh, OK, OK, OK.

[1:34:45] It's not saying area, it was supposed to just be art.

[1:34:49] And then an A sign.

[1:34:50] Yes, yeah.

[1:34:51] It's like, oh, what's my note for you?

[1:34:53] Yeah, those are little ticks in your brain.

[1:34:55] Oh, no, and it's, I'm just, I knew who was writing it.

[1:34:59] I know what's going on,

[1:35:00] but it might be confusing to someone else.

[1:35:02] That's awesome, thank you.

[1:35:05] There were two different oversights.

[1:35:07] There was oversight, like you're looking over a thing,

[1:35:09] which is what you meant, but it said, S-I-T-E,

[1:35:11] and I was like, oh, man, is this a planning term?

[1:35:14] I'm not aware of this.

[1:35:16] And I was like, no, no, context.

[1:35:17] Yeah, the brain, it's the brain, but how?

[1:35:19] It's fine, I understood it.

[1:35:21] Thank you.

[1:35:25] Okay, I think we're good on that, yeah?

[1:35:26] Anything else you want?

[1:35:27] Yeah, one of the, yeah,

[1:35:28] and regardless of the attached secondary dwelling unit,

[1:35:31] the S, the D-S-D-U.

[1:35:33] Yeah.

[1:35:34] And the reason we're suggesting that we need this

[1:35:36] is because on them, and we have a liberal view

[1:35:40] of what a dwelling unit can be.

[1:35:42] But because we have already defined what our liberal views are,

[1:35:46] well, I mean, do we really need this particular definition?

[1:35:50] So again, it's about consistency.

[1:35:52] So it's helpful for planners to be referring to the same thing

[1:35:59] across the Kestrela area.

[1:36:00] So that's about consistency.

[1:36:02] OK.

[1:36:02] Yeah.

[1:36:06] Right.

[1:36:08] And by-law.

[1:36:09] Yeah.

[1:36:10] No, I know that.

[1:36:11] That's good.

[1:36:12] Because it goes to the fourth one

[1:36:15] the accessory residential unit, where would you ever have?

[1:36:20] Okay, sorry, were you jumping ahead?

[1:36:22] Basically, back to definitions.

[1:36:23] Oh, okay, it looks like we're...

[1:36:25] We need to move real faster to definitions.

[1:36:27] Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[1:36:28] So you did want to miss the discussion

[1:36:29] of the accessory residential unit,

[1:36:31] which is on a non-residential, principally used property.

[1:36:35] And then understand where you have that secondary building

[1:36:38] on a property that doesn't allow,

[1:36:40] remember, primary, well, I think that's what this is.

[1:36:44] Oh, this is where the principal uses commercial or industrial.

[1:36:48] You already allow, so you already allow a unit commercial.

[1:36:52] So that would be, again, this is about being really clear about what the use is, right?

[1:36:57] So it's accessory to, so the way that we, in bylaws, we basically said it's accessory to the blah, blah, blah, blah.

[1:37:04] But this way we're just saying, let's just define it.

[1:37:07] It's an accessory, which means the primary use of that property is not residential.

[1:37:14] So it means you have to have that other use in order to have it.

[1:37:17] Thank you.

[1:37:18] We just changed this for me too.

[1:37:20] So I'm realistic.

[1:37:21] I've never seen that.

[1:37:21] I've never seen that.

[1:37:24] Well, can you repeat that?

[1:37:25] We're working through Maine and we're working through Gabriola and so...

[1:37:31] Yeah.

[1:37:32] Yeah.

[1:37:33] Cool.

[1:37:37] Yeah, we're good on that condition.

[1:37:38] Okay, so case 22 is the permitting secondary units.

[1:37:45] Yeah, sort of just correct.

[1:37:48] So this is like unsuitable are one lot so this is this is where we use the analysis to look at where there's water at what's being close to town.

[1:38:01] what's being close to town.

[1:38:04] So on the map, this is where you can look at the map again.

[1:38:08] The area, and this is also responding

[1:38:11] to the address six stretch by the housing,

[1:38:13] ABT and also through the public health consultation

[1:38:18] around having, allowing like more options closer to town

[1:38:26] and closer to downtown Devon and ferry there.

[1:38:29] So that area really came out really clearly,

[1:38:34] like when you look at all the analysis

[1:38:35] of the place where there's water,

[1:38:38] it's within the building area.

[1:38:41] And so that's an option is if you want to look

[1:38:45] at the permission of, so secondary units currently

[1:38:53] are not permitted in the ER1 zone.

[1:38:56] So this would provide, so again, your options are, you could allow it just in all R1 principal units, or you could look at it from a perspective of where is the better place to allow that.

[1:39:16] And again, with respect to that particular area, there wasn't a lot of, when you look at the mapping, there's not a lot that's suggesting that that's not a good area.

[1:39:26] The other interesting thing to point out is there's not a lot of power that's not along 200 meter from the sea area.

[1:39:34] And that is basically, I think the only area that is the south.

[1:39:42] You're talking about area yeah downtown area it fits our first room. Yeah, there's a green so like across from

[1:39:52] Yeah, yeah, so it's a lot of secondary

[1:39:58] units

[1:40:00] And there's a lot of wetland in there, it's the only thing.

[1:40:04] But that's why you look at a lot of water.

[1:40:07] I know.

[1:40:08] It's like the bottom of the region.

[1:40:10] Yeah.

[1:40:11] Well, it was horrible.

[1:40:14] I mean, there are quite a lot of those properties in there.

[1:40:19] It just don't look like it.

[1:40:20] Right. That's true.

[1:40:21] Yeah.

[1:40:26] I mean, I am pretty confident that at least a couple of those places already have secondary dwellings.

[1:40:34] I might have eaten water so it will be...

[1:40:39] So for me that was where my thinking was, well they're already there and I don't think it's her anybody and they are close to town and they are her, whatever else.

[1:40:48] I think it's important to be cautious of that wetland is not just an abundance of water, it is also a portable wetland that needs to be there.

[1:40:57] So, but I don't see, there's also geological restrictions around what they could do down there anyways.

[1:41:06] So I, that my inclination was that it worked for me. I would agree that it doesn't make sense to dad,

[1:41:14] you know, a lot of the other R1 areas, which all seem to be much too close to the ocean to be really going gung-ho on that.

[1:41:22] But yeah, that was sort of my.

[1:41:26] You've ever been an ideal parcel to look at the opportunity to make a picture of overestimate allow existing houses that are traditionally, yeah, and it's not, and that's still within their attention, you know, generally, like as a, as a general state.

[1:41:47] If we embed that in after this project is over, next, Kevin, I think it's a great project to be part of.

[1:41:57] Yeah, so I'm sorry.

[1:42:03] Eating nutrition soon.

[1:42:06] So we'll take a break.

[1:42:24] It's a great discussion, you guys.

[2:17:05] We are reconvening.

[2:17:07] We are streaming.

[2:17:09] We are not recording yet.

[2:17:16] Now we are recording.

[2:17:19] So we are reconvening.

[2:17:23] Are we handing it back to planet Chad?

[2:17:26] Are we just telling her to go?

[2:17:28] Where did we get to?

[2:17:30] We are on 4.5 at page 22.

[2:17:32] I think we are on 4.5 at page 22.

[2:17:34] Permanent secondary units on super.

[2:17:36] We will start for behavior.

[2:17:38] We will start for behavior.

[2:17:40] We will start for behavior.

[2:17:42] So, I said we'll start for finishing while we're having my paper still open.

[2:17:47] Like I said, I've been before.

[2:17:51] Yeah, which is basically what we were talking about.

[2:17:53] That's right.

[2:17:53] So, just to re-enter, to come back to it, right?

[2:17:57] Right now, R1 is not permitted to have secondary dwellings.

[2:18:01] This is just an identification of an area in R1 where there will be,

[2:18:08] so let's just say more suitable than there are R1 areas to allow secondary suite.

[2:18:12] And so, I mean, you can, so you're using,

[2:18:16] are really like when you want to allow

[2:18:18] sector seats in R1 and under watch conditions,

[2:18:23] and this is an option.

[2:18:25] I mean, the thing, I mean, I think what you were saying,

[2:18:28] David, in terms of this might be a good group of people

[2:18:30] to approach about them approaching us

[2:18:34] to get permitted permission for that,

[2:18:37] might be the better way to go.

[2:18:39] Because then we're not forcing it on people

[2:18:41] don't otherwise want it, and not creating that ability for people who otherwise aren't.

[2:18:46] But we're opening the door for people to keep, we're already doing it. And it might just be

[2:18:51] simpler to keep again, and I sort of keep coming back to this, but it's like, well,

[2:18:56] we're gonna make a decision for a zoning, let's make that the whole island, and not,

[2:19:00] let's not specifically limit it to certain zones based on this, as much as the, the

[2:19:05] the 200 meter boundary from the sea is a significant

[2:19:10] like consideration and it's obviously a request

[2:19:12] that we've heard from COMOCs,

[2:19:14] that staff have heard from COMOCs.

[2:19:16] If we apply it everywhere, then we're not,

[2:19:18] it's not preferential and also we're not,

[2:19:22] we're still encompassing that.

[2:19:23] We're still, we're going,

[2:19:24] where I think I'd rather go above and beyond

[2:19:26] that request than to, than to the,

[2:19:29] So, so are you are you considering so in your instrument figure out what the direction is

[2:19:38] the direction.

[2:19:39] My suggestion would be that we do not extend permission by these at this time, but the

[2:19:47] person is people interested in.

[2:19:52] So I think I think we don't need to.

[2:19:55] Because again, we're money waters when we have these sub definitions of those openings,

[2:19:59] And I'd rather...

[2:20:00] have. I'd rather I would love to come out of this with an infographic with R1 and then a little

[2:20:05] adress. R2 and then a little adress and be able to put that up and say this is what the things are.

[2:20:11] This is what you could do. Sure and then like there's stuff that can be done that could be

[2:20:17] the asterisk on the bottom but like a really simple chart that says this is what it is and

[2:20:21] it's not except if you're on x-stroke. Yeah there are a lot of the other kids that are

[2:20:27] really suffering from a lot of shortage of

[2:20:29] to even consider having the ability to have

[2:20:34] sweet food, make those super neighbors.

[2:20:37] So if that neighbor wanted to look at it,

[2:20:41] a group or two application,

[2:20:44] they want to do the work of bringing their neighbors

[2:20:48] outside or whatever.

[2:20:49] That's a project with another team.

[2:20:52] Yeah, I agree with you, Sam.

[2:20:54] Yeah, it was a request in the HPC things to have those secondary buildings in a lot. But when you look at it specifically where the slots are

[2:21:05] And we are creating that that option in other places. So

[2:21:12] Okay, so the next one is the next picture is that accessory residential unit. So you already allow them just just providing the term defined. So you're already allowed in

[2:21:27] about in Lake Dusseer Lake commercial. So this would be extending and defining the term

[2:21:34] and permitting it as a secondary use to institutions.

[2:21:39] Makes sense. I agree.

[2:21:41] So the next one is interesting because this is to be thought about in the context of the

[2:21:46] other decisions that you've made. So this is put there to provide an option for an additional

[2:21:54] 12 units. So you know, you've now identified one and the other in forest in what are we?

[2:22:06] Forest in our, our two smaller and then you supported the secondary suites in our two. So that's where you're going to add now.

[2:22:19] Like telling you of the

[2:22:21] That's the well, the decisions. Yeah. So, so this one is in those areas where based on the options that you identified, there are still areas which would not be permitted to have an additional unit.

[2:22:41] So this provides a potential option that would be,

[2:22:48] it awaits a substitute for the TUP situation.

[2:22:51] So it's allowing an additional unit outright,

[2:22:58] but only if there is a benefit that is secured

[2:23:03] to a covenant or a household.

[2:23:07] housing that you're doing.

[2:23:09] So for example, I can even identify the example.

[2:23:12] Again, I don't know what the property

[2:23:13] and I don't know what it was zoned as,

[2:23:15] but a community meeting, there was a woman

[2:23:17] who was very celebratory in fact that she had got

[2:23:21] the covenant on her land for protecting the land.

[2:23:26] And she is interested in having another unit on her property.

[2:23:30] I'm assuming she's probably part one or something,

[2:23:32] not able to have one.

[2:23:33] So this would provide an opportunity to give

[2:23:36] somebody goes through the process of that,

[2:23:40] to have an extra unit.

[2:23:42] Yeah, and to me this spoke to, sorry,

[2:23:45] I'm just gonna turn it off.

[2:23:47] To me this spoke to what we had talked about before

[2:23:50] in terms of spot setting.

[2:23:51] Like this effectively allows for under certain,

[2:23:54] specific circumstances this will allow for,

[2:23:57] you know, you go through a process

[2:23:58] against the seven criteria,

[2:24:00] you will allow a bonus density based on that.

[2:24:04] But it is a case by case question, which would that that's where at least that's how I can turn it out. Yes, the difference between rezoning and what this is, in terms of conceptually like this is a mechanism for legalizing potentially something that already exists or creating the opportunity for an affordable housing thing that is specifically tied to something like that.

[2:24:28] That's exactly correct. So when I think about it too, in the case where posts were down,

[2:24:32] that was not legal. On a property that is in an area that's been identified by the Interior

[2:24:42] Conservancy as an important area for conservation. They, without having to go through a rezoning

[2:24:49] to get a covenant on their property to protect that area, then they get that unit.

[2:24:54] Yeah. It seems like it spoke to the concept of that I was trying to get at in December.

[2:25:14] And I yeah and it has that sort of trade built in. I mean I've always I did the long-term release

[2:25:21] concepts for for subdivision and more or else were always really interesting as well.

[2:25:25] But yeah, that, and again, obviously land conservation and donation of land to First Nations.

[2:25:31] We've never seen this before.

[2:25:33] It's not been, this is completely new.

[2:25:36] Something that we would also put through people because we haven't done anything like this before.

[2:25:41] So, knowing that you're supportive, it gives us support to really do that work.

[2:25:46] And it's good work because it'll also inform other projects too.

[2:25:52] Okay. The one thing I think we maybe skidded over, I don't know if that was intentional,

[2:25:59] was the TUP question at 4.2. Did we talk about it? I didn't remember.

[2:26:08] I know we went really quick, but that was just like, I don't remember us actually talking about it.

[2:26:12] But I have a quick question.

[2:26:15] Yeah, but thank you because I honestly, if anything that's

[2:26:20] upsetting your mind, you want to go back to anything, we need to go there because we need

[2:26:25] to make sure that we're really secured while your decisions are in the court.

[2:26:29] Yeah, no, no, that is.

[2:26:33] Okay, so, okay, so the reasoning flexibility piece, there's a few, there's a few things that

[2:26:41] that are easier to think about than you do

[2:26:44] that will require a new thought.

[2:26:46] The first one is relating to increasing rezoning flexibility.

[2:26:52] That's really about the current,

[2:26:56] and it's about providing more clarity within the bot

[2:27:00] within the OCP and ultimately the alignment of these files

[2:27:04] around the kind of rezoning that can happen.

[2:27:08] So being very clear in wording that housing can both be,

[2:27:15] the multiple units can both be combined units

[2:27:19] but also separate units and also potentially

[2:27:24] putting some restrictions on what that separate unit

[2:27:26] situation looks like.

[2:27:27] And it's, you know, when I think about this,

[2:27:30] I think about the application that's incurred

[2:27:34] just over here in small units, but within an area.

[2:27:38] So this would be about in the OCP,

[2:27:42] just a lot of flexibility for separate units

[2:27:46] to be considered the reason for housing.

[2:27:50] How would we get that one up?

[2:27:54] And then that would be the lighting by-law

[2:27:58] to have some more details around that.

[2:28:21] So, so clustered housing, full concept of clustered housing,

[2:28:25] assumes in mind, undeveloped.

[2:28:29] An undeveloped lot or a lot that might have a couple of units

[2:28:32] and only be allowed up those couple of units.

[2:28:34] So it's pretty neat that they want that property owner

[2:28:42] wants to add some more units.

[2:28:47] So, you know, in the case of,

[2:28:48] It may be interested in sort of like a mini-covo sort of thing, but there's already a principle

[2:28:58] dwelling potentially on the plot.

[2:29:00] So it's not necessarily an empty lot.

[2:29:03] It could be an existing lot.

[2:29:06] I guess my concern is that by forcing a clustering, it doesn't allow a lot which has perhaps a

[2:29:17] a unique geologic or geographic or layout perspective,

[2:29:21] which doesn't lend itself to clustering.

[2:29:23] Right.

[2:29:24] Like a strip, a block that's adjacent to the road and power.

[2:29:32] Why did you put everything?

[2:29:36] It's just there's not enough flexibility.

[2:29:39] It's not too much.

[2:29:39] Yeah, that's the thing.

[2:29:40] Clustering can calm up more.

[2:29:43] I mean, what you could say is clustering

[2:29:48] is encouraged, but provide the flexibility for circumstances.

[2:29:54] That's all I'm looking for.

[2:29:55] Yeah, so you want to-

[2:29:56] Give them more ability to look at the lost characters

[2:30:01] to give it a while.

[2:30:03] The land and all that.

[2:30:04] Well, to me, it's a little bit more than just

[2:30:07] the mushrooms.

[2:30:08] I've talked about this before,

[2:30:10] but as people who live on islands,

[2:30:13] we have pre-selected as humans to be cut off

[2:30:16] to some degree from the rest of humanity.

[2:30:18] Pretty much.

[2:30:20] And so that tells me something about anybody

[2:30:22] who chooses to live here.

[2:30:25] And I'm all for allowing Western,

[2:30:31] probably stock shorter in current or encourage.

[2:30:34] I understand the reasons for it,

[2:30:36] but also again, we're dealing with so few specific instances

[2:30:42] that I think creating like a specific template

[2:30:45] that we're trying to encourage is less useful than just,

[2:30:49] What have you got happening on your particular place?

[2:30:51] What are the realities of where it's possible to get power

[2:30:54] and to where water is possible to?

[2:30:57] I think allow clustering and allow

[2:30:59] for the things that are broadly spoken about in terms

[2:31:02] of number of units.

[2:31:03] But I'm not interested in encouraging clustering.

[2:31:06] Build them where you need to build them.

[2:31:08] Maybe there's one little spot that has a really great view

[2:31:10] because it's high up on the property

[2:31:12] and that's a nice spot for a place to be.

[2:31:14] But then the rest of them make more sense.

[2:31:16] You've got some mobility issues.

[2:31:18] You've got some young buck who's going to split all your firewood and happy to live up on top of the hill and then everything else wants to be somewhere they can get to out of their car.

[2:31:25] That's fine, but the different concepts and I I'm not interested in encouraging clustering specifically absolutely if that's what people want to go to property, they should be free to do that, but let's create opportunities not not not encouraging particular kind of growth, because I don't know what I don't know what anybody wants to do.

[2:31:45] necessarily. I mean, I think to go back to the definition, oftentimes, this type of thing,

[2:31:56] there's a shared kitchen unit or a shared washing unit or a shared shower unit. So the definitions

[2:32:03] where we see must have a washroom, must have a kitchen, but this is where you start getting out

[2:32:08] of that slide. That's where I was concerned, you know, the definitions being too prescriptive.

[2:32:12] I understand why they had it, and I know we're trying to stand across the language across the trust,

[2:32:17] and I think that's a really good idea. And I think if we get too prescriptive, we might miss,

[2:32:23] or might inadvertently create problems for people who are living in a way that might be,

[2:32:28] they'll seem weird to other people, which obviously none of us can relate to.

[2:32:31] I know that, and I can't depend on the communities, far from the past,

[2:32:36] Because we kind of might see a penta-blue drawing unit,

[2:32:39] and then they'll have like a kitchen unit

[2:32:42] that really cooks it.

[2:32:43] Yeah.

[2:32:43] Oh, yeah.

[2:32:44] So what I'm hearing is-

[2:32:47] Well, if I just specifically get to that.

[2:32:49] So let's look at this a little bit differently.

[2:32:52] We like clustering.

[2:32:54] Why?

[2:32:55] We like clustering because there's an assumption

[2:32:57] that there's a reduction in land clearing.

[2:33:00] There's a reduction in the amount of the structure

[2:33:03] that needs to be held or stolen.

[2:33:05] reduction in. So let's keep all those values, those important things, but remove the word

[2:33:12] clustering. In other words, if the lot can accommodate x number of houses, at that minimum,

[2:33:21] the impact on the land is smaller than if it was everybody was in one corner. And you've actually

[2:33:29] you did a better job of protecting the environment

[2:33:33] by not prescribing clustering,

[2:33:35] that we have prescribed the benefits clustering

[2:33:38] without saying clustering.

[2:33:39] The benefits can be achieved without clustering,

[2:33:41] then you can do one.

[2:33:42] Yeah, that makes sense.

[2:33:45] Increase the infrastructure clustering,

[2:33:48] not necessarily working with it.

[2:33:50] Because for example, you might have someone

[2:33:51] who has a little wood stone and lives way in the hell

[2:33:54] and gone in the back, but they come down

[2:33:56] and do their dishes and cook

[2:33:58] in a centralized location with everybody else.

[2:34:01] That just created more options is, yeah.

[2:34:05] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[2:34:07] So what I'm hearing is we allowed to be flexible,

[2:34:11] but in the rezoning criteria,

[2:34:13] it'd be very clear about what you're looking for,

[2:34:15] which would be limited impact,

[2:34:16] which I've identified.

[2:34:19] It's all, yeah, you're spoken to,

[2:34:20] and then just the specific emphasis

[2:34:22] on specifically clustering buildings.

[2:34:24] Yeah, I think it's not necessary.

[2:34:26] Yep.

[2:34:27] possibly tease us out for for complication later.

[2:34:31] Yeah. Okay.

[2:34:33] And I always think it's interesting that we continue to look at access to public transportation.

[2:34:44] So this proximity to downtown, we're only 12 miles long.

[2:34:49] Yeah, three miles wide.

[2:34:50] So the difference between being downtown,

[2:34:53] being at either end is about 10 minutes by call.

[2:34:57] So I understand why we have very limited access to increase against the downtown downtown doesn't have any more septic capability. Yes, that's the stress with water and we're surrounded by AR. So in a way that particular proximity

[2:35:15] That particular proximity, it doesn't really work so well here.

[2:35:19] That's just reality. We tried before, we tried before, we tried the zone within a hundred, whatever it was, half a kilometer or something, up in downtown, half of which is in the ocean.

[2:35:31] But that, we just looked at it. There was no cooperatives.

[2:35:35] Look, there's lots of water.

[2:35:36] There's lots of water.

[2:35:37] See, a lot of float acts.

[2:35:38] Salty water.

[2:35:39] But it's not, it's not cold.

[2:35:41] This, that one doesn't work as well, would it? Anyway.

[2:35:44] Okay, noted. Yeah. So the flexible has a thing. So this is about, again, the opportunity to permit, to permit flexibility in the OCP to identify areas that can have multiple units within a maximum floor area.

[2:36:07] So this is an anticipating, I mean, you have not in our discussions, there's not enough

[2:36:19] any areas that have been identified.

[2:36:22] We haven't gone through a process like we did with Main Island, the right to define

[2:36:26] an area where you want to allow the specs ability.

[2:36:28] So the question is, do you want to have language in the OCP that permits that of future LTC to

[2:36:37] consider that without having to go through an OCP environment?

[2:36:44] I think so. Yeah, I think that, I mean, it's not really, it doesn't appeal to most people,

[2:36:48] but it's an option that is being looked at by the generation that are ex-operable.

[2:36:54] Well, we'll see. We'll see.

[2:36:56] I mean, yeah, yeah. Sharing land is becoming more and more affordable financially better

[2:37:05] being the only option. Yeah, yeah. So we've got the language, we're using it for

[2:37:12] Maine and we're using it for D-R-U so it's a test drive.

[2:37:21] Okay, now we move into doing

[2:37:24] What basically is the most maximum floor areas because again it's just something that people

[2:37:31] can focus on and react to and then they can step back and adjust if we have to.

[2:37:36] Yeah I wanted to clarify just sort of like I like to say I think I like

[2:37:41] just concepts here. The concept here is that maximum floor areas are these larger numbers

[2:37:50] But we're still, and I know that we're coming to this in a lot of coverage stuff, talking

[2:37:57] about max footprints for individual buildings.

[2:38:00] That's still, what I'm understanding is that we're still going to be setting maximum floor

[2:38:06] area for a single structure.

[2:38:08] If you will do.

[2:38:10] Yeah, that concept is in the mix.

[2:38:14] So potentially what might be here is that, okay, yes, there's this 200, 2500 square foot base building,

[2:38:21] plus potentially up to 3000 square feet of other buildings in plus five nectar, which

[2:38:32] some of those numbers still seem very large to me.

[2:38:40] And so much like some of the house I can section looking at this chart with the various distributions.

[2:38:46] Okay, yeah, yeah, so this is this is all about the spine or area, which would be all buildings,

[2:38:55] but yeah, when you so there was a button. And also the idea that you just put a restriction

[2:39:03] on the primary. Yes. And then in some of so amazing this, this doesn't decisions now that

[2:39:12] If you already have a primary line,

[2:39:14] you can search the side of the secondary array,

[2:39:18] or you can see this.

[2:39:19] You can create an approach.

[2:39:33] So I think the difference,

[2:39:34] so the difference between the complex housing numbers,

[2:39:38] there's a lot of coverage numbers

[2:39:39] and then there's maximum progress.

[2:39:40] Exactly.

[2:39:41] So there's like three different things here.

[2:39:43] Yeah, and as I went through this,

[2:39:44] like these are all really good things.

[2:39:47] So I think to have some clarity about,

[2:39:52] trust why it would be really useful,

[2:39:54] or somebody based on some of the discussions

[2:39:55] that have a lot of stress councils,

[2:39:58] it would be really good to sort of like.

[2:40:00] have some clearer education happen

[2:40:04] about this separate tool or project.

[2:40:06] In terms of where it applies specifically to us.

[2:40:14] Yeah, in terms of the flex housing thing,

[2:40:15] I think I understand the concept here.

[2:40:25] It makes more sense for us to move on to sort of

[2:40:27] what we're talking about in the next section,

[2:40:28] which gets into a lot of coverage.

[2:40:34] And there's specific guidelines.

[2:40:36] So yeah, whatever. Take that.

[2:40:45] Yeah, I think we've talked about this a couple of times. So the lock coverage refers to the percentage of the total area that they covered by buildings. So we're just talking about space, the buildings off the ground, the footprint.

[2:41:01] And then in that table, there is some suggestions.

[2:41:08] So this is based on what we've seen

[2:41:10] in other local trust areas.

[2:41:11] So yeah, we're proposing that based on the size of the lot

[2:41:17] that would dictate the lot coverage percentage that's allowed.

[2:41:23] But they're all up for discussion.

[2:41:26] These are all reductions on our current

[2:41:28] allowable lot coverage percentage.

[2:41:31] Yeah, to the natural environment.

[2:41:35] Yes.

[2:41:36] In my respect.

[2:41:37] Other than, OK, well, I'll take the rest of my time.

[2:41:41] I'm going to zoom out and we can't stop it anyway.

[2:41:46] So this is an attempt to minimize the carbon services,

[2:41:52] which impact groundwater absorption and slugs,

[2:41:57] things like that.

[2:42:00] It's in a quite few different content there.

[2:42:03] So that kind of impact.

[2:42:05] And then you can see the one column there

[2:42:08] that has the approximate house size.

[2:42:10] Yeah, that's it.

[2:42:11] Yeah, so that just really illustrates

[2:42:13] what the lot coverage and then if you don't have

[2:42:16] a floor area restriction,

[2:42:19] those two kind of go ahead and do that.

[2:42:20] And then the extrapolation there.

[2:42:22] Yeah.

[2:42:23] It's actually a useful tool for people to go,

[2:42:26] what?

[2:42:27] Yeah.

[2:42:28] What?

[2:42:29] From 25% to five.

[2:42:30] And then you have Kevin, still covering the box.

[2:42:33] I'm going to put that on the screen.

[2:42:35] Oh, OK.

[2:42:36] Yeah, 900 square meters is 3-quarters of the size of a pork knobs.

[2:42:42] There you go.

[2:42:44] So, you know.

[2:42:47] The Federal Reserve is looking for a new location.

[2:42:51] It's allowed, technically.

[2:42:53] It's very difficult to show that you're protecting the natural environment the way you're developing.

[2:43:00] So this is the big dilemma that we trust.

[2:43:04] You're a land use organization, you're a privateer and they teach the technical.

[2:43:11] How do you get rid of all of you?

[2:43:13] Oh, okay, good. But wait a minute, you've got items on people though.

[2:43:16] Oh, okay, so what do we do?

[2:43:18] So what we can do is reduce the lifetime of our customers.

[2:43:22] That's about all we can really think about.

[2:43:25] I love the idea of giving someone a community benefit for the exchange for a constitution government.

[2:43:31] It's only the balance of probably the constitution.

[2:43:34] That's the items that used to be called, you know, a consistency branch of the United States is where we do the protection.

[2:43:46] or we do the protection.

[2:43:48] That's the part of the trust that protects.

[2:43:50] This part is the first that doesn't protect.

[2:43:53] Yeah, so this is an opportunity to...

[2:43:55] Exactly.

[2:43:55] To go into that.

[2:43:56] Yeah.

[2:43:57] This is it, so I'm going to go to the numbers.

[2:43:59] Yeah, I like these proposed things.

[2:44:01] They still, they're crazy huge numbers

[2:44:03] if you think about it too much,

[2:44:05] but also it can be lots of other things,

[2:44:07] it's not just concepts.

[2:44:08] Yeah, it's really important.

[2:44:09] Yeah.

[2:44:12] We probably can't expect lot coverage on the elevator.

[2:44:17] Well, guess, pretty far.

[2:44:20] I think there's some sea lars.

[2:44:22] Yeah.

[2:44:22] I've said can still be things.

[2:44:24] I think just people,

[2:44:26] yeah, there's a city.

[2:44:27] There are, we already have, we only have a

[2:44:30] maximum.

[2:44:32] There are 60.

[2:44:34] I'm not, you're talking about, I'm talking about, I don't think we could say,

[2:44:40] we're just talking about the road.

[2:44:44] I think we're allowed to be more.

[2:44:45] We'll double check on the notes.

[2:44:48] Please do.

[2:44:49] Yeah.

[2:44:52] Yeah, I don't even know what they made at the end.

[2:44:58] It was a five thousand.

[2:44:59] No, I'm telling the next five thousand support equation.

[2:45:02] Combine us maximum.

[2:45:04] On it, on it.

[2:45:06] Just slightly less than what the problems suggested.

[2:45:09] Yes.

[2:45:10] That was like, it's true.

[2:45:12] Yeah.

[2:45:14] Are you okay?

[2:45:15] Okay, so you're good with those numbers for now.

[2:45:17] and you can see the boat there, see where that goes.

[2:45:21] So this other one is just, I mean, really it's introduced

[2:45:24] just as a perspective, mostly.

[2:45:28] And with-

[2:45:30] What did you want to talk about, Florida?

[2:45:32] I thought we just talked about Florida.

[2:45:33] We'll talk about Florida.

[2:45:35] Okay, sorry.

[2:45:36] That was Florida.

[2:45:36] Sorry, sorry.

[2:45:38] So this is the interior space of the building,

[2:45:42] of the dwelling units.

[2:45:45] So right now there's no floor area restrictions,

[2:45:48] aside from what you just mentioned,

[2:45:49] on the agriculturally zoned land.

[2:45:52] So staff have proposed a fixed maximum

[2:45:55] for principal dwellings on lots,

[2:45:58] 25 meters per 250 meters squared,

[2:46:01] which is 2,690 square feet.

[2:46:08] On a 0.5 acre, half acre lot,

[2:46:10] this corresponds to about a 6% lot coverage.

[2:46:15] And then variances could be applied for on a case by case basis

[2:46:20] if someone wanted to go about that.

[2:46:22] Yeah, I know this is, and certainly in the public engagement

[2:46:26] that we did, I sat at the table for which this was

[2:46:29] an extremely contentious issue.

[2:46:32] And I, you know, I understand the arguments,

[2:46:38] but I think that as a body that, you know,

[2:46:43] has a duty to some constellations and also,

[2:46:48] yes, we can't necessarily tell everyone

[2:46:50] to have a tiny house in Norwood,

[2:46:51] or I think we should,

[2:46:52] because it's lots of different pieces of needs

[2:46:54] that people have for that.

[2:46:56] That said, I do think there's an important statement

[2:47:00] that gets made by saying,

[2:47:02] actually, no, there is a clear set out of that

[2:47:05] to what's appropriate,

[2:47:09] and it feeds into a lot of other components

[2:47:11] in terms of like how the land is used,

[2:47:13] what kinds of things are done and water

[2:47:16] and all the other things, the larger house you have,

[2:47:18] the more likely you already have,

[2:47:20] many multiples of bathrooms and so on and so forth.

[2:47:23] So I am in favor of an excellent,

[2:47:28] and initially I think in December,

[2:47:29] I had done for 300 square meters,

[2:47:33] 250 square meters is slightly more conservative,

[2:47:37] but I'm open to sort of talking about it.

[2:47:40] I think it makes an important statement from the LTC

[2:47:44] about what we think is appropriate and acceptable

[2:47:46] on the island.

[2:47:48] Yeah, appropriate.

[2:47:50] And because there is the freedom to apply for a variance,

[2:47:55] if you wanna do something else,

[2:47:57] that then brings it to the stable

[2:47:59] so that it's sort of have a look at it.

[2:48:00] I think that's not unreasonable.

[2:48:03] And I think it does speak to RDD2 to impose

[2:48:07] you know, a different way or not to focus, but to support the different modes of living

[2:48:14] that happen elsewhere. So that's my six and a half cents.

[2:48:21] What is 300 square meters in?

[2:48:24] It's 300 and it's 3,300.

[2:48:27] Yeah, 3,229.

[2:48:30] Yeah.

[2:48:31] Yeah, which is pretty large to my mind,

[2:48:37] but my mind is not the same as all mine's.

[2:48:39] So, but I thought it was maybe not an unreasonable thing.

[2:48:44] I know it's certainly a lot less than some people would like

[2:48:47] and it's by the same token,

[2:48:49] it's a lot more than other people's would like.

[2:48:51] So.

[2:48:52] And that's that figure of fixed maximum

[2:48:56] for principal dwelling.

[2:48:57] How's that measured?

[2:48:58] Again, you say it's the inside floor area,

[2:49:00] floor exterior wall including eaves. You describe it as interior wall. It's the total habitable

[2:49:11] interior space of a building. So it's measured to the exterior face of exterior walls. So

[2:49:21] it's a two-story house that you carry. You count each floor. Correct. I'm not talking

[2:49:28] No, a lot of lot of coverage is footprint. Floor area is total habitable space.

[2:49:35] But it's not interior, it's exterior. Yeah. Yeah.

[2:49:39] And because with this step code, it's too late walls, you're losing a lot of the footage, almost exterior walls.

[2:49:47] No, it's called home street. Yeah.

[2:49:50] It doesn't count over a.

[2:49:53] And it doesn't, other definitions that I found

[2:49:56] were explicit about non-inclivity needs

[2:49:58] and things like that, unless they were over half a meter,

[2:50:01] I think.

[2:50:02] With decks, attached decks.

[2:50:04] I think deck is not.

[2:50:05] I mean, it's also something so you can play around

[2:50:08] with the definition if you want.

[2:50:10] The definition in the bio currently is the sum

[2:50:15] of the area of all stories in a building or structure

[2:50:18] measured to the outermost wall surface,

[2:50:20] including the areas of roost porches,

[2:50:23] roost terraces and roost dachos.

[2:50:28] Probably roost.

[2:50:28] Roost dachos.

[2:50:31] Yeah.

[2:50:34] I'm probably not comfortable with adding

[2:50:39] what I consider indoor outdoor space for IELTS.

[2:50:42] When you get a dachos, you put a roof over it,

[2:50:44] you're gonna count that.

[2:50:45] Yeah.

[2:50:46] I'm not interested in,

[2:50:47] I don't care about your roost dachos in the same way.

[2:50:50] So let's-

[2:50:51] address the definition of gross floor area.

[2:50:54] Yeah.

[2:50:56] And we could stake it with 26.9, let us throw that.

[2:51:04] But also the pressure of interior versus exterior walls?

[2:51:13] For me, I think in terms of what's easy to measure without going into people's houses,

[2:51:18] I think exterior wall is the way to go.

[2:51:20] I know that that's how it's measured.

[2:51:21] I was looking at it for, I think, Parkville and some parts of that.

[2:51:26] So that's very accurate.

[2:51:28] And that seems to be the standard,

[2:51:29] is exterior walls excluding eaves

[2:51:31] unless they go for those like six meters.

[2:51:33] It's pretty intrusive.

[2:51:34] So I'd say it's pretty nice.

[2:51:36] Yeah, I'm sorry.

[2:51:37] I just don't think we want to do that.

[2:51:39] Yeah.

[2:51:39] But do check with the people

[2:51:42] that just did their interior.

[2:51:44] Yeah.

[2:51:45] Wow.

[2:51:46] I'm surprised if I'm not forcing,

[2:51:48] say, well, we don't want to be in your interior house.

[2:51:52] That seems intrinsically.

[2:51:55] Anyway, that's cool.

[2:51:58] But because I would suggest it all, it comes about large, the

[2:52:03] expectancy, maybe 300.

[2:52:07] Sure. I mean, the answer 100 meters was what I had based on,

[2:52:10] I mean, I did a bunch of reading on sort of and I went on a

[2:52:13] housing builder calculator, which was mapping out what those

[2:52:18] different classes look like, and based on size and giving you a

[2:52:21] bunch of floor plans based on square footage. And it was sort

[2:52:25] help me get perspective on what that looks like one of the 3000 square foot

[2:52:29] answers to 2000 square foot has to look like it there all those are yeah I think

[2:52:37] you go with wherever you want yeah I 300 meters I think it's a little bit

[2:52:41] bigger I don't think it's gonna make a huge difference in a game like we're

[2:52:44] still limited by cost or whatever else bit yeah that's fine with me 250 was also

[2:52:50] fine I was like oh that's less than I was gonna go for I'm happy with that

[2:52:53] but I think it probably will ease the state potentially for those people who are very

[2:52:59] out of arms kind of. I'm thinking of it as a builder that's 16 times

[2:53:03] four foot each floor. That's pretty calm. Right. Exactly. And I think that's not

[2:53:08] that's not crazy. I think that's a reasonable thing. You've got a big family doing multi-generational

[2:53:12] housing. And you can always apply for a very good facility. Exactly. And that's a lot of people do.

[2:53:20] like a lot of people about their main house where their family lives and then their all this kid lives out in the whatever it is. So yeah.

[2:53:32] Yeah, okay. So yeah, so this last one is really again, just just

[2:53:37] as a bit of respect that you would require more work, which is probably not what you want to stop doing.

[2:53:42] But but also just just sort of like a consideration as you're making decisions to support

[2:53:53] additional accessory dwelling that's just going to keep in mind that there is an opportunity

[2:54:02] to create more protection through development permit area.

[2:54:05] Like I said, I don't think you're going to end up with this where you want to be creating

[2:54:10] more work for staff at this point, but I think it's important to throw that in for future

[2:54:15] LTCs that if there is an interest in providing more protection on how these are built and

[2:54:22] when there's no option. I mean if you were like, no we want to now then we can start to look at how that...

[2:54:33] I've been following the amendment process of the Heritage Conservation Act and it's now going back

[2:54:39] to the dark board. I'm just wondering if it makes more sense to wait for that

[2:54:45] to finally create a cheap, feasible document, then look at it as adopting that specific

[2:54:55] piece of data.

[2:54:56] Yeah, well I think what we're looking at is Hervage Multi-Gravation Area, and that is,

[2:55:01] I mean moving forward with that, doesn't necessarily impact the work that's currently going on.

[2:55:07] And I think it's in the context of the Combox brand,

[2:55:13] that the whole trust area is an opportunity

[2:55:16] to see how it could be applied.

[2:55:20] And in the DevNet case,

[2:55:22] the work is happening on your island,

[2:55:23] so you'll be able to understand that whole process.

[2:55:26] And then the opportunity to expand that

[2:55:30] will be something that will be easier.

[2:55:31] It's like almost like that is a bit of a pilot project

[2:55:35] to explore what's possible,

[2:55:36] to do it, and then I'll open up the opportunity for a decision to expand or to create more

[2:55:45] development permit areas. And the Comox station has staff engaged in looking at those things.

[2:55:56] So they'll have a lot to offer to a conversation around the larger expense.

[2:56:02] So do you have to work this out and put it on your future project?

[2:56:06] So that's the next term.

[2:56:07] That was mine.

[2:56:08] Yeah.

[2:56:09] Okay.

[2:56:10] I like everything that I see there, but I think that it's probably a bigger project.

[2:56:15] Yeah.

[2:56:16] So putting on your future project is an important thing.

[2:56:21] Yeah.

[2:56:22] Yeah.

[2:56:23] No, no, no.

[2:56:24] And I appreciate the work that's already been done just to identify and play ahead.

[2:56:28] Yeah, so there's just like kind of just supporting material. Yeah, it's just a part of it. So, no more decisions.

[2:56:40] There were some things on page 129 that I know that I wanted to talk about.

[2:56:46] What page is the...

[2:56:50] 11 of the notes.

[2:56:52] 11 of the notes? Is that the destiny cap?

[2:56:54] No. So it's the affordable house, but the seniors started to pick up.

[2:56:58] Policy.

[2:57:00] Policy.

[2:57:02] It's in the...

[2:57:04] Page 11.

[2:57:07] Page 11 of the...

[2:57:09] Yeah, I've already said that.

[2:57:11] Yeah.

[2:57:13] Yeah.

[2:57:15] Oh, right. Yes.

[2:57:17] Yes, these are.

[2:57:21] These are land use bylaw suggestions. Yeah, yeah.

[2:57:28] If you're wanting to put any restrictions like you know again like I didn't find the criteria that you'd want me to drink these.

[2:57:35] These buildings by so the work that you're doing trapped in bylaws.

[2:57:41] Let me go see if you buy this at this point.

[2:57:44] We're going to do both.

[2:57:46] So you want some comments on it?

[2:57:49] I think this is OCP.

[2:57:50] So no CPA.

[2:57:52] Yeah, OK.

[2:57:54] All right.

[2:57:55] And I would like to comment.

[2:57:57] Yes.

[2:57:58] On the such application, shaw.com.

[2:58:02] So are we on the same page or was it?

[2:58:04] So it says be limited to maximum of 10 additional units.

[2:58:07] My question is, why 10?

[2:58:09] Right.

[2:58:09] I mean, again, the numbers are in there for discussion.

[2:58:12] Why 10 because again, like we're, we're working with different across the trust areas.

[2:58:20] Like this.

[2:58:21] So this is, uh, I think, I think this is informed by me, but yeah, the

[2:58:27] numbers are in there is like, let me get the question is that we need to.

[2:58:30] So what would you use in previous generation of USB is in scale.

[2:58:36] Yes.

[2:58:37] As opposed to giving a number so that the local trust can be able to

[2:58:40] time.

[2:58:46] Remember, I

[2:58:49] pay for

[2:58:53] the setting and how to impose this sensitive

[2:58:56] surrounding.

[2:58:57] Well, we already regulate. So why are we

[2:59:02] why we got something here.

[2:59:03] In this case, if you're creating,

[2:59:06] if you're creating some easy creating

[2:59:08] So for multi-unit development, which may require expanding beyond the already identified type

[2:59:20] or that, like you're basically creating a new dump.

[2:59:24] You're thinking about that.

[2:59:26] Well, if you were right, like I mean, it kind of was a proposal.

[2:59:30] Yeah.

[2:59:30] Yeah.

[2:59:31] Okay.

[2:59:32] Okay.

[2:59:32] Okay.

[2:59:32] Fine with that.

[2:59:33] Okay.

[2:59:35] Oh, this one I really hate.

[2:59:36] DPs for form and function.

[2:59:39] Yeah, yeah.

[2:59:40] Well, that's thrown in there.

[2:59:41] I just forgot.

[2:59:42] You made it?

[2:59:43] We'll take it up.

[2:59:44] We had the same DP for the downtown dammit.

[2:59:45] It needs nothing.

[2:59:46] Absolutely.

[2:59:47] Nobody knows how to define it.

[2:59:49] Yeah.

[2:59:50] And then page 130, which we just started.

[2:59:51] Wait a minute.

[2:59:52] That is 130.

[2:59:53] Well, that is 130.

[2:59:54] Okay.

[2:59:55] Okay.

[2:59:56] Okay.

[2:59:57] Okay.

[2:59:58] Okay.

[2:59:59] Okay.

[3:00:00] Okay.

[3:00:01] Okay.

[3:00:02] Okay.

[3:00:03] Okay.

[3:00:04] Okay.

[3:00:05] Okay.

[3:00:00] He is a total for area and well, it's not, it's a C, sorry, it can't be run away.

[3:00:11] So the units are anchored to the ground.

[3:00:15] Yeah, so this is very specifically related to tiny homes on wheels.

[3:00:21] And this is the advantage was their own wheels.

[3:00:24] Well, so this is if you want them to be legal, like actually considered like so.

[3:00:29] So this is come out of a discussion with the regional district, the number of regional districts

[3:00:37] to look at like how building inspectors would then building permits which could apply to

[3:00:46] to tiny homes or wheels.

[3:00:48] And so this is where that's coming from.

[3:00:50] It's like if you want to follow what has been identified to be something that could be legally

[3:00:57] permitted under building code, then that would be the route.

[3:01:02] I think you need it for a mortgage.

[3:01:07] I think that's the tie-in for a mortgage.

[3:01:09] Yeah, well I think that's part of it, right?

[3:01:11] If you can't get a building permit, then it's very difficult to get a mortgage.

[3:01:15] And then the next one, Shell-Narksy in the floor area, it's 500-inch, 30 feet.

[3:01:20] We don't have building.

[3:01:21] We don't have building for this.

[3:01:22] We don't.

[3:01:23] Yeah, I know it's true.

[3:01:24] Like I said, I was going to get more issues.

[3:01:26] Building codes.

[3:01:28] Those were your kids.

[3:01:30] Building code is like what the, you know, that's that's what that's about.

[3:01:38] So that's the same with the 50 meters where that's also part of the requirement.

[3:01:44] So again, that's the question, right?

[3:01:45] So if you're looking at these smaller units, this is the idea.

[3:01:49] This is that tiny home village, well, you know,

[3:01:55] basically to find the land and sand. What's the day? What's the night?

[3:01:59] Yeah.

[3:02:00] On a year.

[3:02:04] Could be a year.

[3:02:04] Yeah.

[3:02:05] On a year.

[3:02:06] I mean, you've already had the whole question.

[3:02:09] You've already identified like part of it changes that have been previously supported

[3:02:14] about permitting weird other structures.

[3:02:19] But isn't being redundant because of a key with a maximum?

[3:02:33] So why would you be worrying about individual units?

[3:02:38] Because you've got the total.

[3:02:39] Maximum for a zone.

[3:02:45] I think it would be if you wanted to sort of restrict each individual units being a tiny home so you don't have one, you know, 2000 square foot home and then, or maybe you want that but.

[3:02:57] When I'm over all of Sydney, we sat at Tacknell.

[3:02:59] A couple of homes are at 440, that's 400 square meters.

[3:03:03] That's less, but there are bigger,

[3:03:05] double ones which would be 800 square meters.

[3:03:07] And yet they arrived on the site in the same way.

[3:03:10] They were true.

[3:03:11] Well, the site is just, why?

[3:03:14] Why is it important to live in individual units?

[3:03:17] We already have a total of the next one.

[3:03:19] Yeah, that's true.

[3:03:20] That's the question you get.

[3:03:21] So we can move that.

[3:03:22] Yeah.

[3:03:23] Thank you.

[3:03:27] I think that was it.

[3:03:29] Good.

[3:03:30] That's my answer.

[3:03:33] So what's the road forward?

[3:03:36] So there's a recommendation, and that's

[3:03:38] to request staff to proceed with the drafting of the bottom

[3:03:41] line that's based on decision made today.

[3:03:43] So I made some decisions.

[3:03:47] I feel as staff, I feel like we've got really clear direction.

[3:03:53] So yeah, we can move forward with a exciting way.

[3:03:58] I'm waiting three and a half weeks.

[3:04:00] But I am only, well no, that's true.

[3:04:02] I will move the demo now of addressing the Eco staff

[3:04:06] to proceed with the draft and file amendments

[3:04:08] based on decisions made from January 20th of the year.

[3:04:11] As follows, Dr. Cott.

[3:04:13] I think we're good enough with the decisions made

[3:04:16] so that we can get notes.

[3:04:17] That was if I'd like to add a name.

[3:04:19] But our decision period, January 20th meeting period.

[3:04:23] Second.

[3:04:24] Any further discussion?

[3:04:26] Considering how long you're driving,

[3:04:30] we put a provision in Utah

[3:04:33] in the course of housing,

[3:04:35] the fraction of some of that is way far away

[3:04:37] because we wanted to give a meeting to the council

[3:04:40] and have a seat that was in the public sector.

[3:04:43] Thank you.

[3:04:44] At least it doesn't work.

[3:04:45] Both of you.

[3:04:47] Thank you to my full trustee.

[3:04:49] Thank you to those who've been there.

[3:04:51] I want to thank you for that idea.

[3:04:52] This is state, this is step one,

[3:04:55] a multi-step process, but this is a really important one.

[3:04:58] But it hasn't passed yet.

[3:04:59] I want to please hear it.

[3:05:01] All those in favor?

[3:05:04] I'd care to hear it.

[3:05:06] I was going to give you two cents for a minute.

[3:05:08] Yeah.

[3:05:08] You want to speak to Mike?

[3:05:09] I want to speak to Mike.

[3:05:13] And in terms of, so with those bits,

[3:05:17] I mean, and Sharon and I were talking briefly

[3:05:20] during the break, if there are bits of feedback

[3:05:24] for specific hairs that need splitting,

[3:05:27] in the months to come, please don't wait for an LTC meeting also.

[3:05:32] Like if you have something that you know needs to come suggest to the chair,

[3:05:37] if we have a special meeting, we will make ourselves available to the

[3:05:40] best of our ability to do that.

[3:05:42] Cause I, we want to make sure that this moves forward and you're not

[3:05:45] meeting on us to get stuff done.

[3:05:48] Yeah.

[3:05:48] But we've got a lot of people that can, it's about what we can do to support you

[3:05:55] you would probably say that some of it is just the head down,

[3:05:59] but like you do want to support that work

[3:06:01] and make sure that you're not being held up

[3:06:03] on the schedule of the local trust committees.

[3:06:06] So.

[3:06:07] Yeah, thank you for that.

[3:06:09] Okay, so shall we move on?

[3:06:12] We've written a lot.

[3:06:13] We've written a lot.

[3:06:14] So we have no correspondence.

[3:06:16] We have no notice.

[3:06:17] Staff reports.

[3:06:19] We have communications reported.

[3:06:21] I don't know if you've got any public or.

[3:06:23] Lots of questions here.

[3:06:24] Lots of questions here.

[3:06:25] So let's go. So for the sake of interest, I asked off camera, but I will ask on camera,

[3:06:34] when do you anticipate us finding a preliminary staff report on the property known as 7000-15?

[3:06:43] So this is just for a development permanent application. So there will likely not be a preliminary staff report,

[3:06:50] staff report, it will just be a staff report that comes forward with that recommendation

[3:06:54] and looking at all the DP guidelines and whether or not they meet the DP guidelines.

[3:06:59] Just for clarity, that DP is at the far western edge of the property where they approached.

[3:07:05] Comas left, yeah, DPA, wildly to leave.

[3:07:09] There also is DPA 4 on that property.

[3:07:12] I'm talking DPA 4, which is on the extreme western edge of the property where they approached

[3:07:18] in the late period.

[3:07:20] They also approached the Comos Club area.

[3:07:22] So I'm currently reviewing the application,

[3:07:24] though I can't say for sure which area,

[3:07:26] but this is for some people within the DPA area.

[3:07:30] And I'm hoping for March,

[3:07:33] I'm just waiting on the applicant for the GSA report.

[3:07:37] I noticed that the applicant's name is Alvin Soy.

[3:07:42] We're getting information from a gentleman by the name of-

[3:07:45] He's managing the development.

[3:07:48] He's managing to make it point.

[3:07:50] Not the owner.

[3:07:52] Okay, then he's got really curious to know,

[3:07:55] Comos Corporation.

[3:07:57] So if we can get an update on what's missing from our...

[3:08:02] So I did receive an update from Leonard Fomitis.

[3:08:07] And so she says the applicant is still working on providing a preliminary field of reconnaissance

[3:08:13] connoissements in support of their application. The advocate

[3:08:17] has shared that it's difficult to find a consultant to complete

[3:08:19] the work. Staff have created draft bylaws, but they're not

[3:08:23] ready for first reading because they're missing key information

[3:08:26] that needs to be addressed by the preliminary field connoissements.

[3:08:30] For example, the heritage conservation area then needs to

[3:08:32] be informed by the preliminary field work on a slums. Without

[3:08:36] key details about heritage, cultural heritage, the heritage

[3:08:41] conservation area cannot be properly implemented. And staff

[3:08:45] will be sharing draft bylaw wording with the applicant and

[3:08:49] Hobox First Nation and continue to await the PFR before reading

[3:08:54] the draft bylaws to the LTC for first reading. And she just

[3:08:58] noticed that trustees made contact her planner for minus

[3:09:02] if you have questions about the application status before the

[3:09:04] March meeting. So feel free to rejudge directly.

[3:09:07] Appreciate that.

[3:09:08] Thank you.

[3:09:10] That's cool.

[3:09:12] I noticed that a lot of playing goals things in actually notes under the purpose.

[3:09:26] So there were a bunch on page 139 where there's some optional intercomments required and it's

[3:09:35] just not at all clear what those applications are to that context.

[3:09:43] I'm sure it's fine, but it would be, it's a lot less useful.

[3:09:47] Yeah.

[3:09:48] Otherwise.

[3:09:49] Yeah, I'm not sure why that is the case.

[3:09:54] It does seem to be mostly planner pickles, so I'm assuming that it's just that there's

[3:09:59] maybe a different process that they're following in their notes in a different way.

[3:10:03] Yeah.

[3:10:04] I'm not, you know, like I said, I'm not especially concerned, but I didn't notice that it was,

[3:10:09] that those were missing, and I was like, I don't know what's going on over there, so

[3:10:12] might be worth asking some questions or just like getting a yeah well exactly

[3:10:24] and I'd like to arrow so aside about the concerns but but also I'm at least a

[3:10:31] little bit I guess at this point you might see something like a brewery

[3:10:42] This is really appropriate.

[3:10:44] Yeah.

[3:10:44] Yeah.

[3:10:45] So knowing the purpose really makes it big scale.

[3:10:48] Well, you know, I don't know.

[3:10:48] I found one where Planet of the Carter

[3:10:50] has no perfect purpose.

[3:10:52] Oh, where is it?

[3:10:53] It's marvelous.

[3:10:53] I'm not going to be able to do that in the tool.

[3:10:57] I know.

[3:10:57] I'm assuming it's something along those lines.

[3:11:01] Your one, Marvellous, it has nothing in there.

[3:11:03] So it seems like you're probably tight on something.

[3:11:05] And it's either just knock-off screw or whatever else.

[3:11:07] But the one that rocks look like,

[3:11:10] He just didn't type anything in that field.

[3:11:12] I'm splitting your stuff.

[3:11:15] But is this all just auto-generated?

[3:11:17] It's all just auto-generated.

[3:11:19] Yeah, so right the image.

[3:11:21] Yeah, and I know it's in the software.

[3:11:23] This is not an indictment. Just a clock.

[3:11:29] Alright, so let's start with that.

[3:11:33] Okay, so you've got your access portfolio,

[3:11:39] also for you.

[3:11:41] So we need a work program page 155 active projects in future projects. Anything like to raise your concerns or questions or we're going to add

[3:11:53] add some features to what we're doing today.

[3:11:56] If you both prefer to go to March on the...

[3:12:00] The DPA for environmental damage.

[3:12:05] I mean, I'd be happy to have that added to our future projects list.

[3:12:08] I don't know if there's especially a lot of work that needs to be done for us by us for that.

[3:12:12] Just the resolution and weekend?

[3:12:14] Yeah.

[3:12:15] Okay.

[3:12:16] Well, then, so we have to take the reference and wordage.

[3:12:19] I'll try and...

[3:12:23] Yeah.

[3:12:24] Yeah.

[3:12:25] Type something because then I can set it to.

[3:12:29] You're requesting that staff add to the future program.

[3:12:38] Programs.

[3:12:39] This project related to development permit areas for.

[3:12:42] Inheritance protection.

[3:12:43] Yeah.

[3:12:44] Right.

[3:12:46] Request.

[3:12:47] Project.

[3:12:50] Just.

[3:12:51] Or a future project.

[3:12:54] request staff projects.

[3:13:04] We'll be still.

[3:13:05] Just still.

[3:13:06] Or a future project.

[3:13:07] We'll be still.

[3:13:08] I'll take this.

[3:13:18] Lisa, just confirming you,

[3:13:19] you get the motion to that stressful email.

[3:13:25] You can send it to me at the motion at email

[3:13:29] or the Elle Millard email.

[3:13:32] Okay.

[3:13:34] Trustee Orkut will be sending something in your life.

[3:13:37] Thank you.

[3:14:24] the AC and the DC.

[3:14:28] Let me move this thing to the C, right?

[3:14:38] And the second is that you should have it move

[3:14:50] that the demo now lets local trust committee request staff

[3:14:53] to add to the future projects list,

[3:14:56] a development permit area

[3:14:57] for environmental and heritage protection projects.

[3:15:00] I'll second the second.

[3:15:01] Move the discussion, move on the question.

[3:15:05] Hey, with that, our upcoming meeting,

[3:15:10] the next right for meeting will schedule

[3:15:11] Tuesday, March 17th at 10 a.m. here. So we just need to adjourn. So move, subsectively,

[3:15:20] don't care. We're adjourned. Thank you Lisa. Look forward to reading your next

[3:15:27] minutes. Thanks everyone. Thanks Lisa.