Gambier Island Local Trust Committee community information meeting, July 30, 2026

[0:00:13] Voice 4: we're ready to go ready

[0:00:16] Voice 7: all right well good morning everyone um i'd like to call this

[0:00:21] Voice 7: community information meeting of the gambier keats local trust committee to order uh this

[0:00:27] Voice 7: meeting is being live streamed and recorded and the recording will be available later on our

[0:00:32] Voice 7: website begin by acknowledging with respect and humility uh that the lands and the waters of the

[0:00:38] Voice 7: gambier keats local trust area have been home to indigenous people since time immemorial

[0:00:42] Voice 7: Their deep connection to these islands continues to this day.

[0:00:46] Voice 7: We honor their enduring presence, their constitutional rights, and their responsibilities as stewards of these lands and waters.

[0:00:54] Voice 7: I'm Laura Patrick. I'm elected trustee for Salt Spring Island, and I'm chair of today's local trust committee meeting.

[0:01:02] Voice 7: I'm joined by Trustee Kate Louise Stanford, and I don't believe Trustee Bernardo is joining us today.

[0:01:11] Voice 7: together we're your local trust committee we have a number of staff that are joining us today we

[0:01:17] Voice 7: have Sonia Zupanik our planner and we have Diane Corbett a minute taker and Emily Bryant is helping

[0:01:26] Voice 7: us with the the webinar in the background so thank you so much and oh Sonia your presentation's

[0:01:34] Voice 7: working excellent we had some technical difficulties I appreciate your patience on

[0:01:39] Voice 7: waiting for that. Today is the first of three community information meetings on

[0:01:46] Voice 7: the proposed shoreline development permit area guidelines for Gambier Island.

[0:01:49] Voice 7: The same presentation and information is going to be shown in each meeting. The remaining two

[0:01:55] Voice 7: meetings will be held in person Tuesday August 4th from 3 to 4 30 p.m. at

[0:02:00] Voice 7: the Gambier Community Center and Wednesday August 5th from 7 p.m. to 8 30

[0:02:04] Voice 7: p.m. at the John Braithwaite Community Center in North Vancouver. There will be a question-answer

[0:02:11] Voice 7: period later in today's agenda. I'll explain how that will work in a few moments. But first,

[0:02:17] Voice 7: we have agenda approval. To Trustee Stanford, are there any additions or changes to the agenda today?

[0:02:26] Voice 7: Nope. And we approve that through general consent? Yeah. Excellent. The first thing in the agenda is

[0:02:34] Voice 7: an opportunity for any remarks from the trustees and i'd look to our local trustee louis stanford

[0:02:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): thank you chair patrick i just want to say good morning thank you all for zooming in today for

[0:02:50] Trustee Stamford (probable): this information session i want to note the interest and care the community community

[0:02:56] Trustee Stamford (probable): members have demonstrated to bring conversations about the land use and livability shoreline health

[0:03:03] Trustee Stamford (probable): and long-term stewardship to on-goat Gambier Island and the conversation we're having today.

[0:03:09] Trustee Stamford (probable): The proposed guidelines we're discussing today speak to themes that matter, protecting sensitive

[0:03:15] Trustee Stamford (probable): coastal ecosystems, planning for climate change impacts, managing development in hazardous areas,

[0:03:21] Trustee Stamford (probable): and ensuring that shoreline activities respect natural processes and the character of Gambier

[0:03:27] Trustee Stamford (probable): Island. These proposed development permit area guidelines are rooted in the Islands Trust core

[0:03:33] Trustee Stamford (probable): purpose, which is to preserve and protect the unique amenities and environment of the Islands

[0:03:38] Trustee Stamford (probable): Trust area. They support provincial requirements to identify and manage environmentally sensitive

[0:03:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): and hazard-prone lands, and they incorporate long-standing Trust Council policies around

[0:03:49] Trustee Stamford (probable): safeguarding eelgrass beds, natural coastal processes, steep slopes, and the ecological

[0:03:54] Trustee Stamford (probable): integrity of our foreshore. I encourage you to ask questions, share your experiences, and flag

[0:04:01] Trustee Stamford (probable): anything that feels unclear or requires more consideration. These information sessions are

[0:04:06] Trustee Stamford (probable): about building shared understanding so that residents, landowners, and the local trust

[0:04:10] Trustee Stamford (probable): committee can move forward in shaping the official community plan targeted review. Thank you.

[0:04:17] Trustee Stamford (probable): Thank you,

[0:04:18] Voice 7: Trustee Stamford. And with that, I'm going to mention our planner, Sonia Zupanek,

[0:04:24] Voice 7: who will bring us through a presentation

[0:04:27] Voice 7: about the shoreline development permit area.

[0:04:30] Voice 7: And then following that will be a question and answer period.

[0:04:32] Voice 7: So continue, Flannery Zuper.

[0:04:35] Voice 5: Zuper, I'm just going to check my audio,

[0:04:37] Voice 5: make sure you can hear me loud and clear.

[0:04:40] Voice 5: And I'm going to confirm that the screen that you see

[0:04:42] Voice 5: is without any sidebar transitions.

[0:04:47] Voice 5: Okay.

[0:04:48] Voice 5: It is.

[0:04:48] Voice 5: Great.

[0:04:49] Voice 5: Thank you for your patience with my last minute shuffle

[0:04:53] Voice 5: to a completely different workstation so welcome everybody so the purpose of not tonight but

[0:05:02] Voice 5: today's meeting is to share this draft development permit area proposal in the timeline explain how

[0:05:08] Voice 5: this development permit area could work if it is adopted in the future and also make sure you're

[0:05:14] Voice 5: very clear on how to provide feedback to your local trust committee and address your questions

[0:05:19] Voice 5: and understand the timeline for that, as there is no decisions being made today or imminently.

[0:05:27] Voice 5: So let's get started.

[0:05:29] Voice 5: So the first piece I'd like to address is why has this draft shoreline DPA been prepared in the first place?

[0:05:35] Voice 5: And the foundation of our work is the object of the trust.

[0:05:42] Voice 5: So it is to preserve and protect the trust area and its unique amenities

[0:05:46] Voice 5: communities, and the environment for the benefits of residents, the trust area, and British Columbia

[0:05:51] Voice 5: in general. We're cooperating with the municipalities, regional districts, First Nations,

[0:05:57] Voice 5: and all other persons and organizations, as well as the government of British Columbia.

[0:06:03] Voice 5: So this wasn't developed overnight, obviously. We've been working on this for quite

[0:06:08] Voice 5: some time, so I'd like to also cover sort of the timeline of how we got here. But the province did

[0:06:16] Voice 5: did create the Islands Trust with this special purpose to preserve and protect our environment

[0:06:20] Voice 5: while supporting the communities that call them home.

[0:06:23] Voice 5: So every planning decision that we make is guided by this responsibility to balance human

[0:06:29] Voice 5: use with the long-term stewardship of these special places.

[0:06:35] Voice 5: So in 2022, for those of you that remember and were a part of this, there was some community

[0:06:40] Voice 5: engagement that resulted in some recommendations to the local trust committee at that time

[0:06:45] Voice 5: regarding, you know, moving forward with an official community plan review and land use

[0:06:52] Voice 5: bylaw review. And shoreline protection was identified as a high priority. So this grew

[0:06:59] Voice 5: out of that public engagement, as well as recommendations received through government

[0:07:03] Voice 5: to government engagement with Squamish Nation, and subsequent direction from your local trust

[0:07:08] Voice 5: committee to explore specifically a shoreline development permit area as part of the larger

[0:07:16] Voice 5: official community plan and land use bylaw review so we're now at the public engagement stage for

[0:07:21] Voice 5: this one particular piece of the overall review so that's specifically shoreline protection so

[0:07:29] Voice 5: no decisions have been made to adopt this approach this is all still part of the public engagement

[0:07:35] Voice 5: and this work will be presented the engagement summary to the local elected

[0:07:40] Voice 5: officials in 2027 early 2027 after the elections so where we're at in the

[0:07:48] Voice 5: process is sort of phase 2 here targeted community engagement draft development

[0:07:55] Voice 5: permit area in this case we do have for those of you that are following the work

[0:08:00] Voice 5: of this project bylaw 163 which is an amendment to the official community plan

[0:08:04] Voice 5: that was drafted. The local trust committee last week did, or two weeks ago, did give first reading

[0:08:10] Voice 5: to that bylaw, which would add new language in the official community plan for First Nations

[0:08:15] Voice 5: recognition and acknowledgement. But the focus today and for this engagement series is specific

[0:08:20] Voice 5: to just the shoreline protection draft language. So it isn't a bylaw, it hasn't received first

[0:08:25] Voice 5: reading. And like I mentioned, then the remaining phases are to be determined once concluding the

[0:08:32] Voice 5: elections which direction the local trust committee wishes to go so let's talk a little

[0:08:37] Voice 5: bit about the shorelines on gambier island so largely bedrock and pretty resistant to erosion

[0:08:46] Voice 5: as many of you know who are there unlike some of our other gulf islands like north thormanby which

[0:08:50] Voice 5: is 100 sand so this shoreline mapping that we did several years ago shows that there are you know

[0:08:57] Voice 5: several pockets of pebble cobble shell areas which are very important ecologically and recreationally

[0:09:02] Voice 5: but most of the shoreline is characterized by low rock boulder or sea cliffs and gambier island is

[0:09:08] Voice 5: protected you know east and west by by steep terrain that is predominant of howe sound

[0:09:14] Voice 5: anvil island to the north bowen and keats to the south and gambiers occasionally exposed to

[0:09:21] Voice 5: southwesterly storm winds and waves through that collingwood and shoal channels and occasionally

[0:09:26] Voice 5: exposed to the northerly outflow winds and howe sound but there is some fine sediment flats at

[0:09:32] Voice 5: the head of port graves so this mapping is available on our website for those of you that are

[0:09:38] Voice 5: interested in looking at that in more detail historically gambier's marine environment

[0:09:43] Voice 5: supported significant industrial activity including the forestry operations log booming

[0:09:48] Voice 5: marine transportation and these activities shaped that shoreline and the near shore environment and

[0:09:55] Voice 5: it did have significant effects on the seabed conditions the complexity of the habitats

[0:10:00] Voice 5: and natural ecological processes so as these industrial uses have declined or transitioned

[0:10:06] Voice 5: and our understanding of the marine ecosystems has grown there's an opportunity now to support

[0:10:12] Voice 5: recovery and long-term resilience of important habitats that we're going to discuss in more a

[0:10:18] Voice 5: little bit more detail so why is shoreline planning needed now so what happens on the shoreline

[0:10:27] Voice 5: affects what happens below the water. So eelgrass beds, forest fish habitat, and shoreline vegetation

[0:10:33] Voice 5: are all connected, parts of the same ecosystem. And so when we look at overhanging trees and

[0:10:40] Voice 5: native vegetation along the shore, these are absolutely critical as they provide the shade,

[0:10:45] Voice 5: the nutrients, and the stability to support this important food web. So by protecting these

[0:10:51] Voice 5: connections, we help maintain these resilient shorelines for future generations. 19% of Gambier

[0:10:58] Voice 5: shores provide critical eelgrass habitat, which is considered like a mini highway for salmon. It's

[0:11:03] Voice 5: 17% of the shoreline is suitable for spawning habitat for forage fish, which also support

[0:11:10] Voice 5: those forage fish in turn support salmon, support humans, orcas, and many other species.

[0:11:16] Voice 5: seas. So eelgrass specifically is one of those habitats where even just a small patch can have

[0:11:26] Voice 5: a very big impact. The areas that do exist around Gambier Island, which we have mapping for,

[0:11:33] Voice 5: albeit it's a little bit outdated, we're hoping to continuously update these maps to monitor the

[0:11:40] Voice 5: conditions. These provide that critical shelter and nursery habitat for the forage fish, supporting

[0:11:47] Voice 5: the salmon and other marine life. And protecting and restoring eel grasses is about maintaining

[0:11:53] Voice 5: these connections to make this whole ecosystem function. And this mapping is an important

[0:11:58] Voice 5: component of what we're doing at the Island's Trust. So this map is also available on our

[0:12:02] Voice 5: website for folks who want to sort of do a deep dive into looking at the detail, which is not

[0:12:08] Voice 5: going to be super clear at this scale. The other piece is our forage fish mapping, which we've done

[0:12:16] Voice 5: for Gambier Island that shows suitable spawning habitat for those of you interested in looking

[0:12:20] Voice 5: at these maps in more detail so these are small pockets around Gambier Island shoreline they're

[0:12:26] Voice 5: easy to overlook but they support these critical surf smelt and sand lance species which are

[0:12:31] Voice 5: the absolute baseline for this food chain so understanding where these habitats are and where

[0:12:38] Voice 5: they can be restored to flourish again helps us make more informed land use planning decisions

[0:12:43] Voice 5: And so I'll just scroll through some of the examples around Gambier Island, where you can see in more detail the surf smelt Pacific sandlands where it's not suitable habitat.

[0:12:57] Voice 5: This mapping has been a great resource, working with volunteers and conservation groups to produce.

[0:13:04] Voice 5: And these are all recorded and will be available on the website as well.

[0:13:08] Voice 5: So Squamish Nation and the province of British Columbia have entered into a new land use planning agreement recognizing the important cultural and ecological values across Howe Sound.

[0:13:31] Voice 5: And this agreement identifies specifically as well areas on Gambier Island with cultural significance and stewardship priorities.

[0:13:38] Voice 5: So the shoreline DPA dovetails as an opportunity to work in collaboration with these other levels of government and reflect these values in future shoreline planning decisions.

[0:13:50] Voice 5: And so for Gambier Island, it's sites 88 and 83 have been identified in this important landmark agreement.

[0:13:57] Voice 5: So let's get into the actual development permit area.

[0:14:08] Voice 5: So this is a tool that can be established by any local government in British Columbia for a number of objectives to guide new development or land alterations.

[0:14:18] Voice 5: And in BC, the development permit area is a key tool to require a level of environmental protection when development occurs.

[0:14:29] Voice 5: There's a list of guidelines that we develop to ensure a balance of reasonable property use with a long-term protection.

[0:14:36] Voice 5: In this case, the shoreline ecosystems that make Gambier Island so unique.

[0:14:43] Voice 5: So the draft shoreline DPA has been informed to date over the last year and a half by modern shoreline stewardship planning practices, input from the Gambier Island Advisory Planning Commission, and engagement with Squamish Nation.

[0:15:00] Voice 5: A draft of the DPA is available on our website.

[0:15:03] Voice 5: It's also hyperlinked with a public survey that's just been launched.

[0:15:08] Voice 5: and although it is 10 pages we're not going to go through it page by page I'm summarizing this

[0:15:13] Voice 5: for this presentation today I do encourage you to read through this document and submit any

[0:15:18] Voice 5: questions to planning staff or the local trust committee so I'm going to generally provide an

[0:15:24] Voice 5: overview of this document and then hope that you can read through it yourself and provide any input

[0:15:30] Voice 5: or clarification. So the development permit area for Gambier's shoreline area is designed to be

[0:15:39] Voice 5: adjacent to the shoreline to guide any new development or land alterations to ensure that

[0:15:45] Voice 5: development occurs appropriately and allows the LTC to review those applications before certain

[0:15:51] Voice 5: development occurs. And the proposal now is for a 30 meter buffer from the natural boundary of the

[0:15:57] Voice 5: the sea and extend seaward as well. The key objectives of course are to preserve these

[0:16:06] Voice 5: shorelines which do an awful lot of work for us as we've discussed in the just the previous slides

[0:16:11] Voice 5: and to maintain the character of the island as well. So this map illustrates in a very large

[0:16:21] Voice 5: scale here the actual boundary of a potential 30 meter DPA. So I'll just zoom in to say like

[0:16:30] Voice 5: like this little portion of the island, so you can see what a buffer would look like 30 meters

[0:16:35] Voice 5: upland and 30 meters seaward as it overlays over a cadastral map. So for clarification,

[0:16:44] Voice 5: a development permit area is not a new setback to the natural boundary of the sea. So that 30

[0:16:49] Voice 5: meter buffer is specifically just an area of interest. It is not a new setback. This is not

[0:16:55] Voice 5: a park designation. It's not guaranteed public access. This is not expropriation of land or

[0:17:01] Voice 5: or water areas, nor is it prohibiting any development.

[0:17:05] Voice 5: These are guidelines to guide the alterations

[0:17:08] Voice 5: and new construction to ensure that they're consistent

[0:17:12] Voice 5: with the objectives.

[0:17:15] Voice 5: So the types of development

[0:17:19] Voice 5: that could require a development permit

[0:17:21] Voice 5: include the construction of a new dwelling,

[0:17:24] Voice 5: any major additions to existing dwellings,

[0:17:27] Voice 5: subdivision of a lot, shoreline protection works,

[0:17:30] Voice 5: or significant land alterations or excavations.

[0:17:33] Voice 5: So not all development would be subject to a development permit area, and there are specific exemptions already listed in this draft that we'll cover.

[0:17:43] Voice 5: The categories of exemptions are listed here, so that would include normal maintenance of a property or dwellings or outbuildings, repairs within an existing footprint, gardening activities, invasive species removal, small accessory buildings up to a certain size, installation of fencing, installation of trails or walkways, emergency works or farm operations.

[0:18:08] Voice 5: And those exemptions are found on page three of the actual development permit area draft text.

[0:18:18] Voice 5: The type of information that might be requested in addition to an application for a DP could depend on the complexity of what is being proposed.

[0:18:27] Voice 5: So in some cases, a biophysical inventory might be required to identify the species, the plant species that exists prior to the alterations occurring.

[0:18:35] Voice 5: occurring, geotechnical information or erosion hazards, coastal flooding information, if it's

[0:18:42] Voice 5: necessary for the type of proposal that's being made, drainage information. The whole purpose is

[0:18:49] Voice 5: to understand the impacts of the proposed development before a decision is made by the

[0:18:54] Voice 5: local trust committee. So the level of information that's required is also outlined in the draft

[0:19:00] Voice 5: text in terms of the categories of changes for applications. The guidelines you'll note

[0:19:11] Voice 5: when you're looking specifically at shoreline modification categories of guidelines,

[0:19:18] Voice 5: they favor shoreline approaches that work with nature wherever possible. So softer solutions

[0:19:23] Voice 5: to help maintain habitat natural processes and shoreline resilience versus sort of harder

[0:19:30] Voice 5: armoring techniques and engineering, that would be only where necessary to address very specific

[0:19:37] Voice 5: risks. So the intent is to protect both people and the ecological functions that make healthy

[0:19:42] Voice 5: shorelines possible. The draft guidelines support marine access. Obviously, that's a critical piece

[0:19:52] Voice 5: of this. And while encouraging dock design and placement that protects sensitive shoreline

[0:19:57] Voice 5: habitats and maintains the long-term health and ecology of not just Gambier Island but its

[0:20:04] Voice 5: contribution to the entirety of Howe Sound. So we're looking at specific requirements around

[0:20:10] Voice 5: making sure that eelgrass and spawning habitat areas are avoided, that we're minimizing those

[0:20:17] Voice 5: dock sizes and footprints to reduce the impacts on the near shore environment, reducing disturbance

[0:20:23] Voice 5: to the seabed, ensuring light flow through these structures

[0:20:27] Voice 5: and those cumulative impacts.

[0:20:29] Voice 5: So please have a look at those dock guidelines as well

[0:20:33] Voice 5: and provide the local trust committee with any input

[0:20:36] Voice 5: on the practicality of these particular guidelines.

[0:20:44] Voice 5: The draft guidelines support marine access

[0:20:48] Voice 5: while encouraging these protection measures

[0:20:54] Voice 5: that we're looking at.

[0:20:55] Voice 5: So we're looking to achieve natural shoreline processes, retaining natural vegetation where possible and reducing erosion, encouraging softer shoreline protection if possible and adaptation to sea level rise and restoring disturbed areas where possible.

[0:21:16] Voice 5: So I'll walk through an example of a potential application where someone is building a new small outbuilding near a shoreline.

[0:21:26] Voice 5: A development permit does not replace zoning or any other approvals, just to be clear, as another layer of review to ensure that the development is sensitive and designed in a way that meets these guidelines.

[0:21:41] Voice 5: lines so in this case someone is um will show you the purple line if you're able to distinguish the

[0:21:49] Voice 5: color differentiation on your screen is the natural boundary of the sea and the hatched

[0:21:56] Voice 5: yellow is the 15 meter setback that's currently in place for the majority of gambrier island so

[0:22:02] Voice 5: in this case the aerial photo overlay shows that some of these structures were either constructed

[0:22:06] Voice 5: within that or existed prior to those regulations being in place so within that 15 meter setback no

[0:22:15] Voice 5: buildings or structures can be cited currently as as the regulations stand without a development

[0:22:21] Voice 5: variance permit the 30 meter if the development permit area is to extend 30 meters from the

[0:22:27] Voice 5: natural boundary of the sea then any small building that would be proposed larger than 10 meters

[0:22:35] Voice 5: square so in this case a property owner might be proposing a 12 square meter outbuilding

[0:22:39] Voice 5: within 30 meters of that shoreline that would be within the development permit area boundary

[0:22:46] Voice 5: and so the owner would need to submit an application for the dp and pay the application

[0:22:52] Voice 5: fee which currently the gambier island fees bylaw all the other dpa bylaws that we have the fee is

[0:22:59] Voice 5: approximately a thousand dollars staff review the application to confirm that it's complete

[0:23:06] Voice 5: that all the necessary information is provided in terms of the site plan the level of detail

[0:23:12] Voice 5: within that site plan we would work with the applicant to ensure if there's any pieces missing

[0:23:18] Voice 5: that we can have that as part of the package before it's presented to the local trust committee

[0:23:21] Voice 5: so in this case what is there currently in terms of the site in terms of vegetation that's being

[0:23:29] Voice 5: removed that level of detail would be provided as part of the application and we prepare a staff

[0:23:36] Voice 5: report to the local trust committee to explain what the proposal is including site plan the

[0:23:42] Voice 5: package supporting the rationale for the siting of the structure within that 30 meter buffer and

[0:23:49] Voice 5: evaluate how it meets the specific guidelines so is there an opportunity for tree retention

[0:23:54] Voice 5: retention, vegetation retention, replanting, if it's significant removal that's required

[0:24:01] Voice 5: or excavations in that case, are there any drainage or erosion issues as a result of

[0:24:06] Voice 5: the siting of this structure, whether or not there's a need for any professional reports

[0:24:10] Voice 5: that would be identified at the time of application, staff would work with the proponent at that

[0:24:16] Voice 5: point.

[0:24:17] Voice 5: The local trust committee meets typically every five, six to eight weeks, depending

[0:24:23] Voice 5: depending on the time of year, and consider applications at every regular business meeting

[0:24:27] Voice 5: and decide whether or not to issue the permit based on whether the guidelines have been met.

[0:24:32] Voice 5: So there's not a lot of discretionary approval options here. This is very much,

[0:24:36] Voice 5: does the application meet the guidelines that are applicable? Not all the guidelines are

[0:24:42] Voice 5: applicable to a specific example like this. So we would only be looking at those guidelines,

[0:24:48] Voice 5: lines, which are relevant to the proposal. If the application is approved, a permit is registered

[0:24:56] Voice 5: on the property so that future owners can see on title what the requirements are. And any DP in

[0:25:04] Voice 5: British Columbia is valid for a period of two years to commence the approved work. So there

[0:25:10] Voice 5: should be substantial commencement of the work. Otherwise, a new application for a DP is required

[0:25:14] Voice 5: at that point in time. So for the next month and a half or so, the key is to ensure that you have

[0:25:28] Voice 5: access to the draft guidelines, you're able to review them and provide feedback to the local

[0:25:33] Voice 5: trust committee on does this DPA achieve the right balance of what we've identified as a need for

[0:25:38] Voice 5: human use and ecological protection? Are the exemptions appropriate? Are the guidelines clear?

[0:25:45] Voice 5: Are there any unintended consequences that you would like to flag or important protection

[0:25:49] Voice 5: measures that have been missed that should be included. This is important for the local trust

[0:25:55] Voice 5: committee to receive as part of a what we've heard summary in early 2027 when the new elected

[0:26:02] Voice 5: officials are in office and conducting their business. This will be one of the first pieces of

[0:26:08] Voice 5: work that they receive in their project is a summary of what we've heard to date.

[0:26:13] Voice 5: so the two meetings including this today's meeting will be capturing in the minutes any

[0:26:21] Voice 5: questions and answers that are shared with the public as well as survey results the survey

[0:26:27] Voice 5: is available on our website now and will be open until the end of august it could be extended if

[0:26:33] Voice 5: need be but we're hoping that that gives folks sufficient time to read the document provide

[0:26:39] Voice 5: their input through the survey and of course contact staff or the elected officials in the

[0:26:44] Voice 5: the interim if you have any specific questions that you'd like answered outside of these meetings

[0:26:49] Voice 5: that is also completely acceptable so I will pause here so that we can just switch gears to

[0:26:58] Voice 5: facilitating the opportunity for those of you that are here to ask any questions that you have

[0:27:05] Voice 5: I think comments it's up to the chair whether or not you're also just engaging with comments first

[0:27:11] Voice 5: but i thought questions might be helpful to start with and and then switch to comments once we've

[0:27:16] Voice 5: sort of exhausted any questions so i'll stop sharing here but i'm happy to

[0:27:21] Voice 5: pull up any particular slides if folks need that referenced well

[0:27:26] Voice 7: thank you planners very

[0:27:29] Voice 7: informative um before we begin the question and answer period i'd like to outline a few

[0:27:35] Voice 7: expectations for the meeting today. As chair and together with my fellow trustees, I have a

[0:27:42] Voice 7: responsibility to ensure this meeting is respectful, inclusive, and culturally safe for everyone

[0:27:47] Voice 7: participating. That means we'll speak respectfully to one another. We will acknowledge questions and

[0:27:53] Voice 7: differing perspectives without causing harm. We will uphold cultural safety throughout our

[0:27:57] Voice 7: discussions. We will keep the conversation constructive and focused on today's topic.

[0:28:02] Voice 7: I want to thank you in advance for helping to create an environment where everyone feels safe, valued, and able to participate fully.

[0:28:09] Voice 7: We may interrupt if comments are outside the scope of the agenda or do not meet these expectations.

[0:28:16] Voice 7: I do want to recognize that some members of the public may have questions or concerns regarding the draft land use objectives order associated with the implementation of the 2025 Spanish Nation Land Use Planning Agreement.

[0:28:33] Voice 7: The public engagement process for the proposed order has recently concluded, and we understand that the community members may continue to have questions about this proposal and its potential implications.

[0:28:45] Voice 7: However, that matter is outside of the jurisdiction of the Office of Trust, and it is not before the Local Trust Committee today.

[0:28:53] Voice 7: So today's meeting is focused solely on the proposed shoreline development permit area guidelines for Gambier.

[0:29:00] Voice 7: these are proposed guidelines you'll see

[0:29:02] Voice 7: this is the time we really want to hear from you so this is a question and answer period it's a

[0:29:10] Voice 7: chance for you to ask questions about the guidelines your questions and and your comments

[0:29:14] Voice 7: are valued and we will help make informed decisions on the proposed guidelines so if you

[0:29:22] Voice 7: want to speak there is an ability to raise your hand feature so i ask you to do that

[0:29:27] Voice 7: when you're recognized please begin by stating your name before asking your question so is there

[0:29:33] Voice 7: anyone today that has questions looking for their raise their hand functions i would assume there'd

[0:29:49] Voice 7: be a raise your hand function ah we have uh well that's a panel oh that's you i was like who has

[0:29:55] Voice 7: their hand trustee stanford well

[0:29:57] Trustee Stamford (probable): as i'm as we're waiting for people

[0:29:59] Trustee Stamford (probable): people.

[0:30:00] Trustee Stamford (probable): to gather their thoughts on this if they have questions uh there's just a couple of things

[0:30:04] Trustee Stamford (probable): that um i had questions about as we uh from the presentation and um uh plan is a panic you

[0:30:13] Trustee Stamford (probable): mentioned that one uh um that part of the ocp process has gone to first reading and if you

[0:30:21] Trustee Stamford (probable): could just describe what first reading is so that people are aware of what that means

[0:30:27] Trustee Stamford (probable): So

[0:30:31] Voice 5: you're referring to Bylaw 163, which was an amendment to the official community plan to include new language recognizing and acknowledging First Nations in the Gambier OCP.

[0:30:41] Voice 5: And so when a draft bylaw, which is what it was up until now, is given first reading, it's now called a proposed bylaw, which means that it's begun the legislative review process of formally acknowledging to the community and to referral agencies that the Local Trust Committee is comfortable with the draft as presented to be referred out to agencies,

[0:31:11] Voice 5: first nations for comment as well as as public input so they're comfortable enough with the

[0:31:15] Voice 5: language to say now we'd like some input so first reading signals typically that next step

[0:31:22] Voice 5: referrals will not be sent out for this particular bylaw until the next round of elected officials

[0:31:28] Voice 5: are in seat so that period will not be happening but it is the first of three readings and the

[0:31:37] Voice 5: the fourth is adoption of the bylaw. So that legislative process is typical for any bylaw

[0:31:43] Voice 5: in local government in British Columbia. It just signals the formality of this is no longer a

[0:31:48] Voice 5: draft. It's now a proposed bylaw on the table for referrals and for comment. And that will

[0:31:54] Voice 5: recommence in the new year for bylaw 163. In this case, the development permit area text

[0:32:00] Voice 5: that you're referring to and that we're talking about today has not been transferred into bylaw

[0:32:06] Voice 5: language this is simply draft language that will potentially if it's advanced be included in a

[0:32:15] Voice 5: bylaw format so it'll be a draft bylaw first and then if it's given first reading in 2027

[0:32:20] Voice 5: it becomes a proposed bylaw and will be referred out to agencies first nations the advisory planning

[0:32:26] Voice 5: commission and be open for the public to comment on up until a public hearing is scheduled thank

[0:32:34] Trustee Stamford (probable): Thank you. I'm still not seeing any questions. So there's a couple more things I just want to

[0:32:40] Trustee Stamford (probable): highlight is one of the differences, you were very clear on that this is DPAs and that they are not

[0:32:50] Trustee Stamford (probable): a park and not a setback. There are parts of Gambier Island that do have 30 meter parks

[0:32:58] Trustee Stamford (probable): and also other areas that have 30-meter setbacks.

[0:33:06] Trustee Stamford (probable): Could you just briefly reiterate what the difference is

[0:33:10] Trustee Stamford (probable): that this is not the same as those two features

[0:33:16] Trustee Stamford (probable): that do exist on Gambier in small areas?

[0:33:22] Voice 5: So the development permit area, if it's adopted,

[0:33:25] Voice 5: would be applied to the entirety of the shoreline

[0:33:28] Voice 5: is the way it's it's drafted right now in those areas where there's a provincial or regional park

[0:33:33] Voice 5: those guidelines are superseded by you know provincial park boundaries so they don't inform

[0:33:43] Voice 5: decisions on that level for setbacks that are already 30 meters and there's no real

[0:33:49] Voice 5: issue in that case for those properties whose setback is 30 meters from the natural boundary

[0:33:54] Voice 5: of the sea then we're not expecting development in those areas without a variance being approved

[0:34:00] Voice 5: but that doesn't setbacks don't regulate land alteration like tree removal or vegetation removal

[0:34:07] Voice 5: so setbacks are specific to buildings and structures so in this case the development

[0:34:11] Voice 5: permit area is an additional tool for those lots where they do have a more generous setback

[0:34:17] Voice 5: to inform land alterations, such as clearing vegetation.

[0:34:23] Voice 5: Thanks.

[0:34:25] Voice 7: Thank you.

[0:34:26] Voice 7: Trustee Bernardo.

[0:34:29] Voice 7: And I see we have a public hand raised.

[0:34:32] Voice 1: Yeah, thank you.

[0:34:37] Voice 1: I've got a question here that I think it might be helpful

[0:34:40] Voice 1: to help elaborate a little bit about one of the specific things

[0:34:44] Voice 1: that you mentioned.

[0:34:45] Voice 1: You had talked about how shade from shoreline trees is quite important because it is necessary to help foster eelgrass growth and the benefits that flow from that for fish habitat and the rest of the ecosystem in House Hound.

[0:35:04] Voice 1: um when we did a you know a similar um development permit um was proposed and eventually developed

[0:35:15] Voice 1: and adopted for keats island uh dock issues came up uh and that was you know uh those dock issues

[0:35:22] Voice 1: and there's a whole variety of them were of course of great interest to um owners of shoreline

[0:35:28] Voice 1: property and there was a lot of debate and questioning about the proposed changes to dock

[0:35:34] Voice 1: requirements and uh one of the so i'm asking this i'll give you an opportunity to elaborate to

[0:35:41] Voice 1: clarify something which is docks also create shade but the latest best learning about that

[0:35:50] Voice 1: is that they should be um more transparent than past docks uh and because the shade produced by

[0:35:57] Voice 1: docks is to some degree deleterious in fact to eelgrass and i'm hoping you can sort of uh

[0:36:03] Voice 1: elaborate and explain what I assume is the difference. And I'm guessing that it's a tree

[0:36:09] Voice 1: shade will vary as the day goes by and the sunlight moves and as the season goes by,

[0:36:15] Voice 1: and the dock shading is more intense and less movable, if you want to put it that way. So could

[0:36:21] Voice 1: you please elaborate on the difference between dock shade and the shading that comes from trees?

[0:36:26] Voice 1: Because I think that'll be, you know, it's potentially a question that shoreline owners

[0:36:30] Voice 1: might have. Thank you.

[0:36:36] Voice 5: Sure. So part of the vegetation retention priority is also that

[0:36:42] Voice 5: vegetation actually at certain tide levels will be in the water as well. And that creates an extra

[0:36:48] Voice 5: level of habitat opportunity. So when we have branches and vegetation dropping in to the water

[0:36:57] Voice 5: column, that is a critical function of an ecosystem, not just the temporary shading from various parts

[0:37:04] Voice 5: So it's really also allowing for that vegetation to be a part of that marine ecosystem when it's hanging over, drooping in at certain tide levels or where the debris from the leaves and branches is accumulating in that foreshore area in some cases and providing that necessary, albeit temporary, shelter.

[0:37:24] Voice 5: So the shading piece for docks, as you've mentioned, we're looking to create safe access for humans and boats to be securely tied, but with as little possible access, which anybody who's had to pay for a dock will also appreciate.

[0:37:47] Voice 5: nobody wants to overbuild because the cost of construction is uh prohibitive in some cases

[0:37:54] Voice 5: and so we're we understand that this type of marine use is already self-regulated to some

[0:38:00] Voice 5: extent because people want to put as little infrastructure in as possible to reduce the

[0:38:06] Voice 5: cost while allowing for safe access and so we need to balance out the need for creating light

[0:38:14] Voice 5: penetration to the seafloor where possible and but really promoting vegetation for all those

[0:38:22] Voice 5: other reasons versus just the shading we're looking to make sure that the the vegetation

[0:38:27] Voice 5: that feeds and provides that temporary shelter by accessing the water column is

[0:38:34] Voice 5: and the diversity of materials organic materials that are introduced into the water column is

[0:38:40] Voice 5: prioritized as well so i'm not a registered professional biologist to speak towards the

[0:38:45] Voice 5: difference and the differentiation for the different species but our understanding from

[0:38:50] Voice 5: a planning perspective is that we need light penetration but more importantly we need those

[0:38:56] Voice 5: organic elements to be retained for the habitat protection for these small species that desperately

[0:39:05] Voice 5: need those shorelines to have that complexity for shelter, for food sources, and for other

[0:39:11] Voice 5: ecological purposes. Thank you.

[0:39:14] Trustee Stamford (probable): I know there's

[0:39:15] Trustee Stamford (probable): somebody waiting. I don't want to get in the way

[0:39:17] Trustee Stamford (probable): of other people, but I just want to really quickly also state that some of the reasons for

[0:39:23] Trustee Stamford (probable): retention on the shoreline is actually not just for eelgrass. It's for tidal creatures,

[0:39:30] Trustee Stamford (probable): And a good example of what happened in the heat dome was areas that were not protected by tree cover were dramatically more affected in the heat dome.

[0:39:42] Trustee Stamford (probable): There's a lot higher death rate just in those like mollusks and creatures that live in the tidal area.

[0:39:48] Trustee Stamford (probable): So that's another reason for maintaining tree cover or cover in that area.

[0:39:55] Trustee Stamford (probable): But I'll just leave it at that.

[0:39:57] Voice 7: Thank you. Well, we do have a question here.

[0:39:59] Voice 7: House Sound Biosphere Region Initiative, if we can give them permission to speak.

[0:40:04] Voice 7: Hello.

[0:40:05] Voice 6: Hello.

[0:40:06] Voice 6: Hi.

[0:40:06] Voice 6: Yes, it's Ruth Simons from House Sound Biosphere Initiative and also a Gambier Island property owner.

[0:40:16] Voice 6: And thank you for this.

[0:40:17] Voice 6: And it all sounds like progress is being made, which is good.

[0:40:22] Voice 6: And my question, it's kind of, it's not specific to the guidelines, but I'm just curious as to how the natural boundary of the sea is arrived at when sea level rises on the move and storm surges and so on are creating, you know, different, they're changing the boundaries.

[0:40:44] Voice 6: boundaries so that's just out of curiosity and then the other one was also curious because

[0:40:50] Voice 6: keats island since the the bylaw has been or the dpa has been in place if you could just share how

[0:40:58] Voice 6: long that's been if there's been any learnings from that so far

[0:41:03] Voice 7: thank you ruth go ahead planners

[0:41:07] Voice 7: of nick sure

[0:41:08] Voice 5: thank you my understanding is we haven't had any applications yet for the keats

[0:41:13] Voice 5: Keats Island Shoreline Development Permit Area, and that was adopted, I should know

[0:41:19] Voice 5: the date, but I think it was earlier this year, by the time it came back from the ministry.

[0:41:26] Voice 5: Could have been late last year.

[0:41:27] Voice 5: So currently we don't have any applications for Keats.

[0:41:30] Voice 5: We have Shoreline Development Permit Areas in many other local trust areas across the

[0:41:35] Voice 5: islands just, and this is a common tool on the mainland as well with the regional districts

[0:41:41] Voice 5: and the municipal governments so not a unique not a unique tool for us your first question the

[0:41:51] Voice 5: british columbia land surveyors are like the only qualified folks to determine what the natural

[0:41:57] Voice 5: boundary of the sea is so we rely on a an actual survey in that case to determine high water

[0:42:05] Voice 5: the high high water mark and there's a very specific protocol that they have to go through

[0:42:09] Voice 5: to determine the natural boundary of any property.

[0:42:13] Voice 5: So we use, in our case, the mapping that we have.

[0:42:17] Voice 5: We have already established the natural boundary

[0:42:20] Voice 5: for all coastlines across the islands for mapping purposes.

[0:42:24] Voice 5: A development permit area is shown on a map

[0:42:27] Voice 5: in an official community plan,

[0:42:29] Voice 5: and that becomes the geo-reference for measurements,

[0:42:34] Voice 5: 30 meters upland, for example, or seaward.

[0:42:36] Voice 5: and so on a case-by-case basis each individual lot would would have a survey that shows

[0:42:45] Voice 5: their property boundaries and this natural setback or the natural boundary of the sea

[0:42:51] Voice 5: and in some cases where these changes are going to be happening if they're sustained changes my

[0:43:00] Voice 5: understanding is the surveyors are then remapping the natural boundary of the sea where there have

[0:43:05] Voice 5: There have been landslides, slips for Thornby Island, for example.

[0:43:10] Voice 5: There's significant portions of the island that have had to be redrawn because that sustained new level has been achieved and meets the threshold for the BC surveyors to redraw those lines.

[0:43:23] Voice 5: but when there's fluctuations of storm events that doesn't qualify as a new high water mark

[0:43:30] Voice 5: they have to be sort of sustained and regular from my understanding in the in the definition

[0:43:35] Voice 5: of the legislation so we rely on that those professionals to um to guide us in in what's

[0:43:44] Voice 5: going to be you know evolving and changing possible inundation areas and areas that

[0:43:50] Voice 5: that could be, could require remapping, but for now, it's on a case-by-case basis that a survey

[0:43:57] Voice 5: would determine that for any individual lot.

[0:44:03] Voice 7: Thank you. Are there any other questions? I see

[0:44:14] Voice 7: Paul. Hello, Paul, if you can get yourself off mute.

[0:44:22] Voice 2: Yeah, Laura, I won't go on too long here,

[0:44:25] Voice 2: But when we started speaking to you on these subjects, we tried to encourage you to engage a more robust survey of the island's residents' sentiments around these subjects.

[0:44:48] Voice 2: It became very clear through that process that there wasn't much interest in that, but we've carried on on our own to try to understand what people are interested in.

[0:45:05] Voice 2: One of the things people aren't interested in in the summer is dealing with draft bylaws and that type of thing.

[0:45:12] Voice 2: There's no doubt about that.

[0:45:14] Voice 2: that. So I think to encourage you to allow people to at least on those kind of reviews, let them go

[0:45:22] Voice 2: into the fall. The unfortunate thing about all the, you know, all the science Ruth has been

[0:45:32] Voice 2: putting up and other people, it's confusing and contradictory. And it tends to require about 14

[0:45:45] Voice 2: 14 hours to get through it all. I don't think many of my neighbors are willing to do that.

[0:45:53] Voice 2: One of the things I've noticed is that none of, I don't know, anybody on this call

[0:46:01] Voice 2: that lives off-grid on a water access property. We've tried to develop an understanding of what

[0:46:14] Voice 2: what those residents' concerns are, and many of us feel threatened by this process.

[0:46:24] Voice 2: We understand the environmental sensitivities.

[0:46:32] Voice 2: We understand the new Aboriginal sensitivities.

[0:46:37] Voice 2: What we're concerned about is that we don't feel that our sensitivities to trying to live

[0:46:47] Voice 2: in these circumstances, increasing restrictions, what we see as government overreach to

[0:46:59] Voice 2: both the Islands Trust and the SCRD, we see many challenges with what you're trying to push.

[0:47:13] Voice 2: Let me just give you one example since Joe brought up docks. And thanks, Joe, for noticing

[0:47:19] Voice 2: reinforcing the seeming contradictions to shade and no shade. On our property on Gambier,

[0:47:31] Voice 2: you would call my dock too big because it is not 350 square meters. Our dock provides the space

[0:47:41] Voice 2: for two boats, one for the family to use, one for our caretakers to use, one small skiff and room

[0:47:51] Voice 2: room for a water taxi to land that's bigger than you will allow in so we're we will be seeking

[0:48:00] Voice 2: strongly to have these things grandfathered under your new laws I uh I Lord or um Sonia

[0:48:11] Voice 2: I did extend my wallet to get a wider ramp than you will allow at 72 years old a meter and a half

[0:48:21] Voice 2: half-wide walkway would require me to carry a refrigerator on my back. I put in a wide enough

[0:48:32] Voice 2: ramp that I could drive a gator down to the water taxi or boat to get that stuff off.

[0:48:39] Voice 2: I'm often alone on the property. I think I should be allowed to keep that. When we live

[0:48:49] Voice 2: off-grid and water access we probably in many instances need something else to get to the shore

[0:48:59] Voice 2: under the present one more example and i'll stop under the present rules that you're proposing

[0:49:06] Voice 2: a person with a one acre lot in a house would be allowed the same would be both that person

[0:49:17] Voice 2: and a person with a 150-acre lot would be allowed the same size dock, that doesn't seem to be

[0:49:29] Voice 2: reasonable or fair. I'll now stop and remind you that the word I used at the beginning,

[0:49:39] Voice 2: we're not only concerned, we're threatened. Can you understand what it might be like to believe

[0:49:49] Voice 2: that your doorway may be impacted by regulators who don't understand how to live in these

[0:49:55] Voice 2: circumstances. Kate Louise, you've often offered to come over, and over all these years, you've

[0:50:04] Voice 2: never come to see how we live. Thank

[0:50:08] Voice 2: you very much.

[0:50:11] Trustee Stamford (probable): Invite me, Paul. I've never seen an email

[0:50:14] Trustee Stamford (probable): mail saying come on over give me a date let's

[0:50:17] Voice 2: let's chat kate you and i have had talks many

[0:50:20] Voice 2: time on this you know that yeah i

[0:50:24] Voice 2: would like an

[0:50:26] Trustee Stamford (probable): invitation thanks laura all

[0:50:28] Voice 7: right uh thank you

[0:50:29] Voice 7: paul i think uh it's these are fair comments i think you can see by uh the fact these are draft

[0:50:36] Voice 7: we're here to hear from you and uh the timelines and those things are up you know can be can be

[0:50:44] Voice 7: changed uh that's what we're here for so thank you for your comments today uh trustee bernardo

[0:50:50] Voice 1: yeah i just wanted to clarify um the reason i asked that question about uh you know between

[0:50:56] Voice 1: tree shading and dog shading is it was not to highlight a an apparent contradiction um

[0:51:03] Voice 1: there are a lot of nuances involved in the environmental science involved here and you

[0:51:09] Voice 1: know i won't pretend to understand them and i appreciate where planner zupanek is coming from

[0:51:14] Voice 1: from too. She's operating from a planner perspective that has to rely on expertise that comes from

[0:51:19] Voice 1: elsewhere, either documented expertise or consultation with provincial experts and

[0:51:25] Voice 1: planners who've had other experience with similar issues. So the reason I asked the question is that

[0:51:32] Voice 1: I anticipated that, you know, sooner or later, some shoreline owners are going to ask,

[0:51:38] Voice 1: they're going to see what they believe is a contradiction, but it might well not be,

[0:51:43] Voice 1: and it probably isn't because there is a difference between the shading provided by

[0:51:47] Voice 1: dogs and provided by trees. Do I know what the scientific difference is? No. I just think it's

[0:51:54] Voice 1: a question. And I'm anticipating the answer probably is going to be that it's just different

[0:51:59] Voice 1: when you've got tree shading versus dog shading. And that's, but so, you know, again, I just don't

[0:52:08] Voice 1: don't want to be misunderstood as as being uh perceived to sort of try to emphasize uh some

[0:52:14] Voice 1: kind of contradiction because i you know it's just a question really the other thing is um i i

[0:52:19] Voice 1: appreciate the anxiety you know we ran into this with the peace island bylaws uh as well when we

[0:52:25] Voice 1: introduced the development permit area there and i appreciate there's definitely going to be some

[0:52:29] Voice 1: anxiety of shoreline property owners if if only for the basic question or basic issue the folks

[0:52:35] Voice 1: are perfectly comfortable with the arrangements they've had it up up to this point and you know

[0:52:41] Voice 1: um when you have a boat especially when you have a boat only access area you know you are going to

[0:52:50] Voice 1: have concerns about dogs but also uh your ability to manage your property most folks are going to

[0:52:55] Voice 1: live close to the water they may well have cabins that are within the development permit area these

[0:53:00] Voice 1: are natural anxieties to have and the purpose of these meetings is to help address those by

[0:53:05] Voice 1: answering questions. It's not a closed process. It's actually the beginning of the consultation

[0:53:09] Voice 1: process. And, you know, we are here to answer those concerns. But we need people, we need the

[0:53:19] Voice 1: public to identify those concerns in a specific, in as specific way as possible. It's, you know,

[0:53:27] Voice 1: I'll be honest, we can't deal with generalized anxiety, we can deal with specific issues. And

[0:53:32] Voice 1: And if people bring those specific issues, then we can get our hands around them.

[0:53:36] Voice 1: We can get around those technical, which at the end of the day, end up becoming technical

[0:53:40] Voice 1: issues in terms of drafting in the direction of the bylaw.

[0:53:44] Voice 1: And final point is that, and I'll ask Planner Zupanek to comment on this, is the development

[0:53:52] Voice 1: permit area requirements, whatever they end up being at the end of the day, aren't intended

[0:53:57] Voice 1: to be retrospective, but prospective.

[0:53:59] Voice 1: No one's coming to take away anybody's stock.

[0:54:03] Voice 1: but perhaps planners who've been can add to that thank you so

[0:54:08] Voice 5: just to clarify if a development

[0:54:10] Voice 5: permit area such as this is adopted it becomes an effect on the date of adoption for new

[0:54:15] Voice 5: construction new land alterations only

[0:54:23] Voice 7: trustee stanford yeah

[0:54:26] Trustee Stamford (probable): i was it was just um commenting on

[0:54:28] Trustee Stamford (probable): what that means for new development only so it's following along that um but i think you know one

[0:54:36] Trustee Stamford (probable): One of the things that if waterfront landholders are concerned about specific width of a dock or a ramp, what would be an appropriate width for a dock or for a ramp?

[0:54:51] Trustee Stamford (probable): You know, what would it take? So have those kinds of ideas to present for consideration.

[0:54:59] Trustee Stamford (probable): So those are, you know, we're working with what is a standard model and what, I think we did make some changes on keats based on dock size and shape.

[0:55:13] Trustee Stamford (probable): It's probably different on Gambier.

[0:55:16] Trustee Stamford (probable): And then we can also talk about how variances work.

[0:55:19] Trustee Stamford (probable): that, you know, anything that's outside of what ends up being the final wording,

[0:55:26] Trustee Stamford (probable): how a variance would work in that area, how different dock scenarios can be developed

[0:55:35] Trustee Stamford (probable): for multiple landholders using one dock. You know, there's a different, there's options for

[0:55:40] Trustee Stamford (probable): that as well. And we went through all that on Keats. So, you know, we want to hear from you

[0:55:47] Trustee Stamford (probable): on that. And I would like to say, I hear just as often that nobody wants to participate or

[0:55:54] Trustee Stamford (probable): nobody's around on Gambier in the winter months. It is very challenging to engage appropriately

[0:56:00] Trustee Stamford (probable): on Gambier. It's particularly challenging. So this is one way, but yeah, there's going to be

[0:56:07] Trustee Stamford (probable): no more meetings for quite a while. So there's opportunities to keep talking as we move through

[0:56:14] Trustee Stamford (probable): to the election season so i think there's a lot of options here to keep the conversation going

[0:56:20] Voice 7: um i see ruth sanders up again hi hi

[0:56:28] Voice 6: yeah thank you uh yeah i just wanted to respond to what i

[0:56:33] Voice 6: heard paul say and that's hello paul uh the brigade bay which is where we have our property

[0:56:38] Voice 6: on the east side of gambier island the 65 lots are all off grid um we have a community dock

[0:56:45] Voice 6: and i feel that summertime is actually the best time to be having these conversations to

[0:56:53] Voice 6: uh with neighbors and there's more people on the uh at their properties during this time so this

[0:57:01] Voice 6: is a opportunity to take the time um that a lot of more people have in the summer is to

[0:57:09] Voice 6: to do some reading and research.

[0:57:11] Voice 6: 14 hours, it seems a bit excessive

[0:57:13] Voice 6: to have to understand some of these documents,

[0:57:17] Voice 6: but I know that our community

[0:57:19] Voice 6: is more in touch with each other.

[0:57:22] Voice 6: So I think encouraging people to engage

[0:57:24] Voice 6: and to, instead of fear-mongering,

[0:57:27] Voice 6: actually read and listen to what is being said

[0:57:31] Voice 6: and try to move forward.

[0:57:34] Voice 6: There's a lot of eco-anxiety out there.

[0:57:36] Voice 6: There's a lot of examples of shoreline erosion

[0:57:38] Voice 6: erosion, and a lot of examples of bad practices that have happened to date. So I think this has

[0:57:45] Voice 6: tried to strike that balance, which is what we try to do in Biospheres, just address the impacts

[0:57:50] Voice 6: of climate change, and that things are changing, and we need to do things better. And so finding

[0:57:57] Voice 6: that balance between still how people can enjoy their access to their off-grid properties,

[0:58:07] Voice 6: while still helping the ecosystem recover and be more resilient thank

[0:58:17] Voice 7: you thanks

[0:58:18] Voice 7: and i see another comment from chelsea hi there chelsea hi

[0:58:33] Voice 3: nice to nice to meet you all thank

[0:58:35] Voice 3: you very much for taking the time to uh host today's session um i'm the current commodore

[0:58:40] Voice 3: for the thunderbird yacht club and we have a property at eakins point um i was reading uh

[0:58:46] Voice 3: one of our, we're also a member of the Council of BC Yacht Clubs, so I understand that they've

[0:58:51] Voice 3: sent in a letter, which I was actually just reviewing, in regards to some recommendations

[0:58:56] Voice 3: and amendments, in particular to docks and ramps, very much echoing Paul's sentiments here,

[0:59:04] Voice 3: and also offering assistance and providing some guidance and collaboration, and I see that as a

[0:59:09] Voice 3: a great opportunity for you to understand um what the stakeholders around the island are are

[0:59:16] Voice 3: concerned about and from my understanding we have not the council bc yacht clubs has not yet received

[0:59:20] Voice 3: a response to the letter that was sent in offering assistance and offering recommendations such as

[0:59:26] Voice 3: specific um widths to docks and ramps etc so will you be taking the opportunity to get back to them

[0:59:33] Voice 3: to help collaborate thank

[0:59:36] Voice 7: you i guess i'd look to stop i do remember the correspondence and uh

[0:59:41] Voice 7: we're still in a gathering position but i'd look to staff on how correspondence will be used at

[0:59:48] Voice 7: this stage right

[0:59:49] Voice 3: so trustee stanford had indicated that you guys are looking for specific examples

[0:59:53] Voice 3: on how we could improve the dpa and this is a prime example of stakeholders trying to collect

[1:00:00] Voice 3: collaborate, and share our sentiments and our recommendations so that we can come to something

[1:00:05] Voice 3: that is more widely accepted and appropriate for how residents and stakeholders are using their

[1:00:11] Voice 3: properties.

[1:00:13] Voice 7: No, I appreciate that, Chelsea. I just want to turn to staff now. I'm hearing

[1:00:17] Voice 7: how correspondence will be used. Thank you.

[1:00:20] Voice 5: So all and any correspondence received to date

[1:00:23] Voice 5: is compiled will be posted to the website so that when the local trust committee is wanting

[1:00:30] Voice 5: to make any amendments to the draft text or if they wish to proceed with this project

[1:00:36] Voice 5: after the elections that will all form part of what we've heard engagement summary and that

[1:00:42] Voice 5: should inform amendments tweaks need for more information outreach etc so at this stage local

[1:00:51] Voice 5: trust committee is asking for that information to be submitted to them in writing or through

[1:00:57] Voice 5: these types of forums so it's captured in the minutes all of this will then be compiled into

[1:01:02] Voice 5: that summary document for early 2027 so between now and then there's no tweaking of the draft

[1:01:09] Voice 5: text there's no instruction to staff to go and work with any specific stakeholder groups we've

[1:01:15] Voice 5: We've worked with the Advisory Planning Commission and Squamish Nation.

[1:01:19] Voice 5: Staff do not individually reach out to different groups at this point, unless the local trust committee deems that necessary.

[1:01:27] Voice 5: So that could be a future phase in the new year once the new local trust committee is in place.

[1:01:33] Voice 3: Okay,

[1:01:34] Voice 5: I'm just a

[1:01:34] Voice 3: little bit confused because Trustee Stanford said that you were looking for specific recommendations.

[1:01:40] Voice 3: And my understanding when I read this letter, there are specific recommendations for consideration.

[1:01:45] Voice 3: so

[1:01:46] Voice 5: that's right

[1:01:47] Voice 5: so they've been captured received by the local trust committee anything that comes

[1:01:51] Voice 5: to staff or the local trust committee by email and writing that is received it's part of the

[1:01:58] Voice 5: package of information that's going to be considered so if there's any concern about it

[1:02:03] Voice 5: it having been slipped through the cracks or it's not part of it that's not the case at all everything

[1:02:07] Voice 5: that we receive is part of the package that the future local trust committee will be acting upon

[1:02:12] Voice 5: upon when and if this project proceeds so i'd just

[1:02:15] Voice 5: like to respond

[1:02:16] Trustee Stamford (probable): because it's my comment that

[1:02:18] Trustee Stamford (probable): seems to be causing confusion chelsea um what we have here is is draft for comments um we're not

[1:02:28] Trustee Stamford (probable): incorporating changes as they come in that's not how the local government works we have to wait

[1:02:35] Trustee Stamford (probable): and go through a public process in a public meeting in order to consider any changes

[1:02:40] Trustee Stamford (probable): changes so you're you know provide yes please provide specific uh changes that you would like

[1:02:49] Trustee Stamford (probable): to see and a rationale behind it and then that can be considered in a future process but we don't

[1:02:55] Trustee Stamford (probable): incorporate as we go that um so if that's where the confusion is um and if you feel that we are

[1:03:02] Trustee Stamford (probable): not reaching certain groups of people um by all means please send me their contact

[1:03:10] Trustee Stamford (probable): information because we are also regulated to only reach out in certain ways. So we can't

[1:03:19] Trustee Stamford (probable): deliberately go out to certain addresses if we don't have a clear understanding of who they are.

[1:03:27] Trustee Stamford (probable): This is all run through government databases and things like that. So I have a bit more flexibility,

[1:03:35] Trustee Stamford (probable): but um you know it's just finding the right whose addresses i know there's a series of people that

[1:03:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): don't want correspondence from the islands trust so that's very difficult for me to reach out to

[1:03:48] Trustee Stamford (probable): them so that's another example of you know how do i how do i reach them but be assured any kinds of

[1:03:56] Trustee Stamford (probable): requests for changes go through the local trust committee in a public meeting okay

[1:04:02] Voice 3: thank you and

[1:04:03] Voice 3: And I'm also going to echo Paul's invitation that you're welcome to set up a time and come

[1:04:09] Voice 3: see our property at Eakins and we can walk you through why certain recommendations are

[1:04:15] Voice 3: extremely important for consideration, mostly around safety.

[1:04:19] Voice 3: So I will also pop you off an email with that official invite

[1:04:22] Voice 3: and would love to have you

[1:04:24] Voice 3: come and actually understand what's going on on the island versus base it off of people

[1:04:31] Voice 3: people who are not part of the community making decisions on our behalf well

[1:04:36] Trustee Stamford (probable): um i i i would just

[1:04:38] Trustee Stamford (probable): like to push back a little bit that um there are lots of different interests on this island

[1:04:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): and i do encourage anybody um to reach out and i am listening to a lot of different voices and i

[1:04:52] Trustee Stamford (probable): definitely would be interested in um spending some time at the at the yacht club i haven't

[1:04:58] Trustee Stamford (probable): had the opportunity to so please uh yeah send out an email and i'll get up with you perfect

[1:05:04] Voice 3: thank you very much thank

[1:05:06] Voice 7: you so much uh trustee bernardo yeah

[1:05:10] Voice 1: um i'm really glad this topic came

[1:05:13] Voice 1: up um you know this general area because um what we're really talking about is the nature of the

[1:05:19] Voice 1: process here and um i'll be the first to concede the process isn't perfect uh it is for the most

[1:05:27] Voice 1: part statutorily mandated it is a process of we have the question is how can we as a local trust

[1:05:33] Voice 1: committee make the process the most effective one in terms of making the um public consultation

[1:05:40] Voice 1: real uh and there are some uh people who want to contribute to the public process i think there's

[1:05:47] Voice 1: you know we need to kind of sweep away the formal language a little bit and kind of

[1:05:52] Voice 1: get down to the practicalities of how things really work which is first of all the trustees

[1:05:57] Voice 1: at the end of the day at the end of this process and it's going to be a long one

[1:06:02] Voice 1: because the consultation will go back and forth but at the end of the day the trustees will be

[1:06:06] Voice 1: the decision makers now the trustees um you know no offense to my colleagues here but we don't know

[1:06:14] Voice 1: a lot about uh the technical stuff um we learn uh chiefly through the work product that comes to us

[1:06:22] Voice 1: from the staff. The staff's expertise, as Planner Zupanek correctly pointed out before,

[1:06:28] Voice 1: the staff's expertise is at the planning level. That requires the staff to consult other experts

[1:06:35] Voice 1: and other forms of expertise and information to produce this work product. And as Planner

[1:06:41] Voice 1: Zupanek had pointed out, and I'm elaborating here and if I'm getting a little, you know,

[1:06:50] Voice 1: outside of, you know, if I'm saying anything that's inaccurate about this, I ask the planner

[1:06:54] Voice 1: to pipe in and correct me. But my understanding is the planners have their planning expertise,

[1:07:01] Voice 1: and that requires them to reach out to obtain the best information available to them.

[1:07:07] Voice 1: And it's information that is peer-reviewed or has passed the test of other local governments

[1:07:15] Voice 1: having reviewed it and so it can be relied to some extent they do have to rely on their own

[1:07:20] Voice 1: in various forms on external expertise and exercise their judgment on that they are in a

[1:07:27] Voice 1: difficult position when whether it's a yacht club or somebody else sends in some correspondence and

[1:07:32] Voice 1: says look you know we disagree with this technical aspect of it we think you ought to look at this

[1:07:38] Voice 1: in the background that's just another angle on a technical question that they've already looked at

[1:07:45] Voice 1: by consulting other information so it's not open to them and frankly it's not appropriate for them

[1:07:52] Voice 1: to sort of modify their work simply on the basis of single piece of correspondence that comes from

[1:07:56] Voice 1: the public or an interested party because as trustee stanford pointed out there's a lot of

[1:08:01] Voice 1: different opinions out there the information goes on to the public record because it's supposed to

[1:08:08] Voice 1: be information that we as the trustees end up thinking about in the real world there are volumes

[1:08:14] Voice 1: and volumes of this type of information and this is what i'm getting to i'm cutting to the chase

[1:08:18] Voice 1: now i'm getting to the point which is if you have a specific issue and it's at the technical level

[1:08:24] Voice 1: and you think that there should be changes or a subsequent draft should incorporate them

[1:08:29] Voice 1: incorporate them what you have to do is neg your trustees you you have to reach out both to the

[1:08:35] Voice 1: staff yes get that information to the public record but you're going to have to advocate to

[1:08:40] Voice 1: the trustees and explain to them, take up their time, explain to them why your position makes

[1:08:47] Voice 1: better sense and what the staff is talking about. Because then that puts us in the position not to

[1:08:52] Voice 1: criticize staff, but to ask staff questions. It changes the conversation because we do end up

[1:08:57] Voice 1: having at our public meetings, these formal conversations where we examine these different

[1:09:02] Voice 1: issues and we debate the technicalities and the sufficiency of the technical language in the bylaw

[1:09:09] Voice 1: or the draft technical language and as trustee stamford can testify you know uh you know those

[1:09:17] Voice 1: technical issues can get to be a bit of a grind we spent a lot of time grinding through specific

[1:09:22] Voice 1: issues on the keats island side so i encourage anybody who for example you know yacht clubs

[1:09:31] Voice 1: are in a good position to provide input that is uh has above average it's informed at an above

[1:09:42] Voice 1: average level of a technical understanding of certain aspects of dock construction for example

[1:09:47] Voice 1: and uh in order to bring that forward into the public to maximize bringing it forward into the

[1:09:55] Voice 1: public debate advocating to the trustees and it's going to be after this election if we're realistic

[1:10:01] Voice 1: because it's going to be a new term, advocating with the trustees and pestering them as to why

[1:10:07] Voice 1: this or that provision needs to be changed along this or that line. That's your best avenue to

[1:10:13] Voice 1: getting the changes that you think are appropriate. Will you get those changes? There's no guarantee

[1:10:18] Voice 1: because at the end of the day, the trustees have to exercise their best judgment. But that's how

[1:10:22] Voice 1: you get the issue to the forefront of the decision makers where they have to, that it then gets

[1:10:28] Voice 1: gets serious consideration because it has to be considered by the trustees who then provide

[1:10:33] Voice 1: direction to the staff. Because at the end of the day, the staff works at the direction of

[1:10:37] Voice 1: the trustees. I hope that's helpful. Thank you.

[1:10:41] Voice 7: Thank you. Trustee Stanford.

[1:10:44] Trustee Stamford (probable): I just want to add, it's not a question so much of technical expertise. For me,

[1:10:51] Trustee Stamford (probable): it's a question of interests. You have valid interests. They may be different from the

[1:10:56] Trustee Stamford (probable): interests of your neighbor or somebody on another bay or the interior properties and and what we're

[1:11:04] Trustee Stamford (probable): doing is acknowledging those interests and how do we manage expectations and interests against

[1:11:13] Trustee Stamford (probable): also technical aspects and also provincial regulation and a variety of other aspects to

[1:11:22] Trustee Stamford (probable): these kinds of decisions and we do that we have to do that in a public public realm in an official

[1:11:27] Trustee Stamford (probable): meeting and i think people might not have a technical expertise but they have a very strong

[1:11:34] Trustee Stamford (probable): interest such as i live and water access only off the grid it has certain parameters that makes my

[1:11:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): life more difficult therefore i need xyz to be considered in in the doctor's structure or or

[1:11:54] Trustee Stamford (probable): width of the round those are all valid it doesn't have to be technical it also could be valid

[1:12:01] Trustee Stamford (probable): interests and then we we weigh those off against other interests and that is how we come to

[1:12:08] Trustee Stamford (probable): to coming up with language that fits.

[1:12:10] Trustee Stamford (probable): And there can be opportunity for this works in some ways

[1:12:14] Trustee Stamford (probable): and this works in other ways.

[1:12:16] Trustee Stamford (probable): It doesn't have to be cut and dry across the island.

[1:12:19] Trustee Stamford (probable): So it's a complex process,

[1:12:22] Trustee Stamford (probable): but I have to really emphasize that we all have,

[1:12:25] Trustee Stamford (probable): that this is public.

[1:12:28] Trustee Stamford (probable): Everybody's input is welcome.

[1:12:30] Trustee Stamford (probable): Nobody over or under anybody else's.

[1:12:33] Trustee Stamford (probable): And that it will be considered in a public process.

[1:12:38] Trustee Stamford (probable): And there will also be the survey going out to add another layer of engagement.

[1:12:43] Trustee Stamford (probable): So we'll be working at that level, too.

[1:12:47] Voice 1: I want to thank Trustee Stamford for her clarification.

[1:12:50] Voice 1: She's quite right.

[1:12:51] Voice 1: It's more than a technical issue.

[1:12:52] Voice 1: It's striking.

[1:12:54] Voice 1: It's taking into consideration and weighing not just technical aspects, but those interests.

[1:12:59] Voice 1: And thank you for that, Trustee Stamford.

[1:13:02] Voice 7: And I think it's important as we go through next steps, as we hear what we've heard,

[1:13:07] Voice 7: that will be an opportunity for the trustees in a public meeting to seek further information and

[1:13:13] Voice 7: decide next steps as as they as they go forward you've heard right now the development permit is

[1:13:19] Voice 7: is uniform across all the islands well based on what they hear it could be different based you

[1:13:24] Voice 7: know so there's lots of different directions the trustees could choose to go once they have all

[1:13:29] Voice 7: that information before them in a public meeting all right i see another hand has been raised by

[1:13:34] Voice 7: a seaberry hello hello

[1:13:41] Voice 4: uh this is camilla from gambier oh hi camilla hi and i just want to make

[1:13:47] Voice 4: a distinction about some of the things we're discussing um i have a background in ecology

[1:13:52] Voice 4: and science and technology policy i've also worked for ministry of forests and the department of

[1:13:58] Voice 4: fisheries and oceans and both riparian area regulations and shoreline protection were

[1:14:04] Voice 4: were legislated in the 1990s for fisheries and forestry and and even back decades it's been 30

[1:14:14] Voice 4: meters there's a mountain of peer-reviewed scientific research that backs up this the

[1:14:20] Voice 4: challenge that we're facing is how to apply it to private property and because of course it's

[1:14:27] Voice 4: different when you're dealing with crown land so i just want to make this because um and if i get a

[1:14:32] Voice 4: chance and i can of course i did write a letter about this i can write another one um i just want

[1:14:37] Voice 4: to bring up the example that shade that came up you know that's just one element when you look at

[1:14:42] Voice 4: studies that have studied docs shade is one element they're saying that the turbulence that's

[1:14:47] Voice 4: created by boats is detrimental that the you know toxins that can leach is detrimental like it's not

[1:14:54] Voice 4: not just looking at one parameter. And so I just, I just wanted to, you know, make this distinction

[1:15:03] Voice 4: that with science, I have a tendency sometimes to take my background in it for granted. But

[1:15:11] Voice 4: like, it's really not contradictory. Essentially, what's happening is that we know that development

[1:15:16] Voice 4: very close to the shoreline is inherently detrimental. We know that docks are inherently

[1:15:21] Voice 4: toxic, what we're trying to do is moderate or modify the damage as much as possible,

[1:15:29] Voice 4: because we can't just, you know, eliminate our presence. So I just want to put this in

[1:15:34] Voice 4: perspective, you know, you can always find scientific research that will, you know,

[1:15:39] Voice 4: back up any one particular view. But like, overall, really, like this has been studied

[1:15:47] Voice 4: since the 1990s actually earlier than the 1990s because the fisheries collapsed was in the 80s

[1:15:52] Voice 4: so you know I just want to point this out I want to separate this that we know that what we're

[1:16:00] Voice 4: doing this type of urban development that occurred on islands and that our behavior is inherently

[1:16:07] Voice 4: destructive but we can't stop it so we need to modify it and so to just approach this with a

[1:16:15] Voice 4: little bit more patience um you know that we can find compromises so i just wanted to to say that

[1:16:23] Voice 4: well

[1:16:24] Voice 7: thank you very much for your perspective that was all right are we seeing any other hands

[1:16:37] Voice 7: come up at this point here like i said i think it's very important to understand we're still

[1:16:43] Voice 7: early in the process we want to hear from you there's uh two more of this exact same meeting

[1:16:50] Voice 7: format the same information same presentation that will occur on August

[1:16:55] Voice 7: 4th and 5th and I guess I'd look to a step I think you initially said that

[1:17:03] Voice 7: you're collecting information till August 31st is there an opportunity to

[1:17:07] Voice 7: expand that it's

[1:17:10] Voice 5: just the survey the

[1:17:12] Voice 7: survey closes August

[1:17:13] Voice 5: 31st so then we'll

[1:17:15] Voice 5: compile those results over the fall to prepare that as part of the other

[1:17:19] Voice 5: their package so folks can submit correspondence to northinfo at islandstrust.bc.ca or to the

[1:17:24] Voice 5: local trust committee email or to just myself and I will make sure that it forms part of that

[1:17:30] Voice 5: package that is ongoing so correspondence can come in until January at least until the first

[1:17:38] Voice 5: meeting schedule is set for the new local trust committee and then that will all form part of

[1:17:43] Voice 5: that package we'll be posting online as we go as we do with projects public correspondence becomes

[1:17:48] Voice 5: It becomes part of a project

[1:17:50] Voice 5: compository so everyone can see

[1:17:53] Voice 5: what's been submitted

[1:17:54] Voice 5: to date and we'll keep

[1:17:56] Voice 5: that up to date.

[1:17:58] Voice 7: Thank you so much.

[1:18:00] Voice 7: I still want to give an opportunity.

[1:18:03] Voice 7: We have a few minutes. We have time scheduled

[1:18:05] Voice 7: until 11.30 today.

[1:18:06] Voice 7: I don't want to cut anyone off.

[1:18:08] Voice 7: If there's anyone else that wishes to ask a question

[1:18:11] Voice 7: or comment today.

[1:18:13] Voice 7: I'm not seeing any other hands come up

[1:18:23] Voice 7: so please encourage people

[1:18:24] Voice 7: to participate and understand that

[1:18:26] Voice 7: But we do want to hear from you.

[1:18:28] Voice 7: The survey is open to the end of August.

[1:18:30] Voice 7: Comments are welcome right through to the end of the year.

[1:18:35] Voice 7: And it's northinfo at islandswithanestrust.bc.ca is the email address.

[1:18:44] Voice 7: You can continue to correspond with your local trustees up until October 31st, I believe.

[1:18:52] Voice 7: You are a trustee.

[1:18:54] Voice 7: and uh and then they'll uh the elections are on october 17th i'll look to you local trustees uh

[1:19:05] Voice 7: if we're not seeing any more comments today i think we could probably call this a wrap uh so

[1:19:10] Voice 7: i just need a motion to adjourn from motion to adjourn from trustee bernardo yeah

[1:19:20] Voice 1: just a final

[1:19:21] Voice 1: comment and then i'll make i'll make the motion to adjourn uh i heard a few comments there's a

[1:19:27] Voice 1: certain amount of concern about a one-size-fits-all approach. I just want people to draw comfort from

[1:19:34] Voice 1: the fact, and this is following through really on some of the comments that Trustee Stamford was

[1:19:39] Voice 1: making, nothing about this is one-size-fits-all. Gambier has its, you know, there's one trust area

[1:19:48] Voice 1: here, there's a Gambier local trust area, but there's an OCP for Keats, there's an OCP for

[1:19:53] Voice 1: uh gambier and it has its own and what we're talking about is focused on gambier but even

[1:19:59] Voice 1: within that there are zoning differences um much of this work as we go forward is about will be

[1:20:06] Voice 1: about drawing distinctions about what's appropriate for which areas on the island

[1:20:11] Voice 1: so uh rest assured it isn't a one-size-fits-all mentality here anyhow with that uh unless the

[1:20:17] Voice 1: trustee stanford anybody else did anything to say um i i moved that we adjourned the meeting

[1:20:22] Voice 1: all

[1:20:23] Voice 7: right so a second second trustee stanford so we're adjourned um for today thank you everyone

[1:20:30] Voice 7: your comments are important that's why we're here uh that's why we take the time to be here

[1:20:35] Voice 7: and hear you so thank you very much and uh thanks everyone

DRAFT

Islands Trust

Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

Minutes of Special Meeting

Date: July 30, 2026  
Location: Electronic Meeting

Members Present:  
Laura Patrick, Chair  
Kate-Louise Stamford, Trustee  
Joe Bernardo, Trustee

Staff Present:  
Sonja Zupanec, Island Planner  
Emily Bryant, Planning Team Assistant  
Diane Corbett, Recorder

Others Present:  
There were approximately 17 members of the public in attendance.

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Patrick called the Community Information meeting to order at 10:04 am.

2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Chair Patrick acknowledged that, since time immemorial, the lands and waters of the Gambier-Keats Local Trust Area have been home to indigenous people who have served as stewards of the lands and waters and whose connection to these islands continues to this day.

Chair Patrick introduced staff and trustees in attendance. She noted that this meeting was the first of three Community Information Meetings on the proposed Shoreline Development Permit Area guidelines for Gambier Island.

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

By general consent the agenda was approved as presented.

4. TRUSTEE OPENING REMARKS

Trustee Stamford noted the interest and care the community members had been demonstrating to bring conversations about the land use and livability, shoreline health, and long-term stewardship on Gambier Island and that the proposed Development Permit Area (DPA) guidelines being discussed spoke to themes on protecting sensitive coastal ecosystems, planning for climate change impacts, managing development in hazardous areas, ensuring that shoreline activities respect natural processes and the character of Gambier Island, are rooted in Islands Trust’s core purpose to preserve and protect the unique amenities and environment of the Islands Trust Area, and support provincial requirements to identify and manage environmentally sensitive and hazard-prone lands.

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

1


DRAFT

5. GAMBIER ISLAND DRAFT SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREA PRESENTATION

The Planner provided information on the Draft Shoreline Development Permit Area and noted that no decisions on this subject would be being made at this meeting or imminently.

Points from the presentation included:

• In 2022, community engagement resulted in recommendations to the Local Trust Committee regarding moving forward with an Official Community Plan review and Land Use Bylaw review, shoreline protection was identified as a high priority and government-to-government engagement with Squamish Nation was undertaken. The Local Trust Committee directed staff to explore a shoreline development permit area as part of the larger Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw Targeted Review.

• An engagement summary will be presented to the elected officials in early 2027.

• Shorelines on Gambier are largely bedrock, mostly characterized by low rock, boulder or sea cliffs, and a few pockets of pebble, cobble, and shell areas. Shoreline mapping is available on the Islands Trust website for those interested in more detail.

• Historical industrial activity, including forestry operations, log booming, and marine transportation impacted the shoreline, nearshore environment, seabed conditions and ecological processes.

• Overhanging trees and native vegetation along the shoreline are critical in providing shade, nutrients and stability of marine habitats for eelgrass, forage fish and salmon, which support species up the food chain. Eelgrass and forage fish mapping is available on Islands Trust website.

• The Squamish Nation and Province of BC have entered into a new land use planning agreement recognizing cultural and ecological values across Howe Sound, including areas on Gambier Island with cultural significance and stewardship priorities. Sites 88 and 83 have been identified in this agreement. The Shoreline Development Permit Area (DPA) is an opportunity to collaborate with other levels of government and reflect these values in future shoreline planning decisions, guiding new development and land alterations.

• The Draft Shoreline DPA has been guided over the past year and a half by shoreline stewardship planning practices, input from the Gambier Island Advisory Planning Commission, and Squamish Nation engagement. The intention is to preserve shorelines and maintain the character of Gambier Island.

• The Draft DPA is available on the website, along with a newly launched public survey (survey open to August 31). The public is encouraged to read the ten-page document and offer feedback to Planning staff or Local Trustees.

• A 30-meter buffer upland and seaward from the natural boundary of the sea is proposed for certain development. This buffer is an area of interest, not a new setback, park designation, nor guaranteed public access, nor is it prohibiting development. Types of development that could require a development permit include construction of a new dwelling, major additions to an existing dwelling, subdivision of a lot, shoreline protection works, or significant land alterations or excavations with specific exemptions listed in the guidelines on page 3 of the draft DPA text.

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

2


DRAFT

• Information on such aspects as biophysical inventory, geotechnical, erosion/hazards/coastal flooding, or drainage might be requested in addition to an application for a development permit, with the intention to understand the impacts of the proposed development before a decision is made by the Local Trust Committee.
• The DPA will favour approaches that work with nature where possible, “softer” solutions that help to maintain habitat, natural processes, and shoreline resilience, over harder armoring engineering techniques.
• The draft guidelines support marine access, encouraging dock design and placement that protects sensitive shoreline habitats and maintains long-term health and ecology of Gambier.
• The intention of these protection measures is to achieve, where possible, natural shoreline processes, natural vegetation, erosion reduction, softer shoreline protection and adaptation to sea level rise, and restoration of disturbed areas.
• The application fee for Development Permit Areas as per the current Gambier Island Fees Bylaw is approximately $1000.
• People are encouraged to review the draft DPA guidelines and provide the Local Trust Committee feedback on:
  ○ Does the draft DPA achieve the right balance of human use and ecological protection?
  ○ Are the exemptions appropriate?
  ○ Are the guidelines clear?
  ○ Are there any unintended consequences that should be flagged?
  ○ Are there important protection measures that have been missed that should be included?

6.    QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

Chair Patrick invited questions and comments.

Questions and comments included the following:

• Part of the OCP process has gone to First Reading, what is meant by “First Reading”.
  ○ First Reading means the bylaw is no longer a draft but is called a proposed bylaw, meaning it has begun the legislative review process and formally acknowledging to the community and referral agencies that the Local Trust Committee is comfortable with the draft as presented. When a draft bylaw is given First Reading, it becomes a proposed bylaw and will be referred out to agencies, First Nations, the Advisory Planning Commission, and be open for public comment until a public hearing is held.
• What is the difference between the proposed Development Permit Area and parts of the island that have 30-metre parks or 30-metre setbacks.
  ○ The Development Permit Area, if adopted, would be applied to the entirety of the Gambier shoreline. In areas where there is a provincial or regional park, these guidelines are superseded by provincial park boundaries. Setbacks do not regulate land alteration, like tree or vegetation removal, and are specific to buildings and structures. The DPA is an additional tool to inform land alterations such as clearing vegetation.
• What is the difference between dock shade and the shading that comes from trees.

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

3


DRAFT

○ Part of the vegetation retention priority is that vegetation at certain tide levels will be in the water, and that creates an extra level of habitat opportunity. When branches and vegetation drop into the water column, that is a critical function of an ecosystem. It provides necessary although temporary shelter and shading.

○ For docks, the intention is to create safe access for humans and boats while not overbuilding, balancing the need for creating light penetration to the seafloor. The diversity of organic materials introduced into the water column is prioritized.

○ Light penetration and organic elements should be retained for habitat protection for the smaller species that need the shoreline to provide shelter, food sources, and other ecological purposes.

○ A trustee added that the value of the retention on the shoreline is not just for providing cover for eelgrass but maintaining shade for tidal area creatures like mollusks.

• How is the natural boundary of the sea arrived at when there is sea level rise on the move and storm surges are changing the boundaries?
  ○ British Columbia Land Surveyors are qualified to determine what the natural boundary of the sea is. Islands Trust uses specific mapping and has established the boundary for all coastlines across the islands for mapping purposes.

  ○ A development permit area is shown on a map in an Official Community Plan; that becomes the geo-reference for measurements 30 meters upland or seaward.

  ○ In cases where there have been landslides or slips, such as at Thormanby Island, there are portions of the island that have had to be redrawn since a sustained new level was achieved and meets the threshold for the BC Surveyors to redraw those lines. Fluctuations due to storm events do not qualify as a new highwater mark.

• Since the Keats Island Shoreline Development Permit Area was adopted, have there been any learnings from that?
  ○ Islands Trust has received no Keats Island Shoreline DPA applications to date.

  ○ There are Shoreline Development Permit Areas throughout Islands Trust Area. It is a common tool with regional districts and municipal governments.

• Speaker noted that that they had encouraged Islands Trust to undertake a more comprehensive survey of island residents regarding the draft bylaws. They expressed the view that the summer is not an ideal time for public engagement, and suggested to do this engagement in the fall. They also noted efforts to better understand the concerns of residents living off-grid on water-access properties. Speaker expressed concerns about increasing restrictions and what they perceived as government overreach by Islands Trust and the Sunshine Coast Regional District. They raised concerns about dock size restriction and noted that residents living off-grid on water-access properties may require additional infrastructure to access the shoreline. . The speaker also questioned whether applying the same maximum dock size to both a one-acre residential property and a 150-acre property is reasonable or equitable.
  ○ A Trustee commented that they had encountered similar anxiety of shoreline property owners regarding a Development Permit Area on Keats Island, this is the beginning of the consultation process and Trustees and staff are here to respond to these concerns. The Local Trust Committee would like the public to identify specific issues.

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

4


DRAFT

○ Staff remarked that if a DPA is adopted, it becomes effective on the day of adoption for new construction and new land alterations.

• At Brigade Bay on the east side of Gambier, there are 65 lots off-grid and there is a community dock. There are a lot of examples of shoreline erosion and there is need to address impacts of climate change. It is necessary to find a balance to how people can enjoy access to off-grid properties while still helping the ecosystem recover and be more resistant.

• Inquiry regarding whether there would be a response to a letter sent from Council of BC Yacht Clubs offering assistance and making recommendations, such as specific widths of docks and ramps. Speaker noted this is an example of stakeholders sharing sentiments and recommendations for something that is more widely accepted and appropriate for how residents and stakeholders are using their properties.
  ○ Staff advised that all correspondence received to date would be compiled and posted to the website. After the elections, an engagement summary will be compiled for review by the Local Trust Committee. At this stage, the Local Trust Committee is asking for that information to be submitted to them in writing or at a public meeting where it can be recorded in the minutes. All this will be compiled for early 2027 and no changes will be made to the draft text between now and then.
  ○ Staff had not been given instruction to work with any stakeholder groups. Information that comes to staff or the Local Trust Committee by email and writing would be part of the package of information that is to be considered by the future Local Trust Committee and acted upon when and if this project proceeds.
  ○ A Trustee remarked that this is a draft for comment, and that it would be necessary to go through a public process in a public meeting in order to consider any changes. The speaker was asked to provide specific changes they would like to see and a rationale behind it. That would then be considered at a future process.

• Speaker wished to clarify that riparian area regulations and shoreline protection were legislated in the 1990s for fisheries and forestry. Even back decades there has been a 30-meter setback, which is backed up by peer-reviewed scientific research. The challenge being faced now is how to apply it to private property, which is different than when dealing with Crown land. Regarding docks, shade is just one element. Turbulence created by boats is detrimental, toxins that can leach are detrimental. Development very close to the shoreline is inherently detrimental. Urban development on the islands is inherently destructive; we can’t stop it, so we need to modify it.

Observing no further participants wishing to speak, Chair Patrick announced that it is still early in the process, there will be two more public meetings held in the same format and the survey is open until August 31. Correspondence can be submitted to northinfo@islandstrust.bc.ca until at least the first meeting of the new Local Trust Committee in 2027.

7. ADJOURNMENT

By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 11:24 am.

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

5


DRAFT

Laura Patrick, Chair

Certified Correct:

Diane Corbett, Recorder

Gambier Island  
Local Trust Committee Special Meeting Minutes  
July 30, 2026

DRAFT

6