[1:14] Good morning everyone and welcome to the

[1:16] township of Georgian Bay. I'd like to

[1:18] call this meeting of the planning

[1:20] council for Wednesday, October 26, 2026

[1:24] to order at

[1:28] >> Did I What did I say?

[1:30] >> October.

[1:30] Oh, I'm getting ahead of

[1:32] myself. Well, I'd like to welcome you to

[1:35] the fourth meeting of planning council.

[1:37] [laughter]

[1:38] Okay. No, sorry. I'd like to Wednesday,

[1:40] August 26, 2026. I'd like to call this

[1:43] meeting to order at 9:06.

[1:46] Um, our apologies for the delayed uh,

[1:50] start. Um, not only was there a serious

[1:52] accident on the 400 northbound that

[1:54] delayed some people getting here and our

[1:57] thoughts were are to all those who were

[1:59] involved. Um, but then of course we had

[2:02] some technical difficulties to further

[2:03] delay us. So I appreciate your patience.

[2:08] And with that, in the spirit of

[2:10] reconciliation, we wish to acknowledge

[2:12] the enduring relationship between

[2:14] indigenous peoples and the territories

[2:16] they have traditionally occupied. We

[2:19] recognize and deeply appreciate the

[2:20] historic connection they have to the

[2:22] place, the land, the water, the sky, and

[2:26] all that live on, in, and above it.

[2:30] We are great, excuse me, we are grateful

[2:32] for the opportunity to meet here and we

[2:34] want to thank all the generations of

[2:35] indigenous peoples who have taken care

[2:37] of this land and who continue to care

[2:39] for it.

[2:41] And we want to show our respect.

[2:44] Hundreds of years after the first

[2:46] treaties were signed, they remain

[2:47] relevant today. May they guide our

[2:50] decisions and our actions. We commit to

[2:53] learn, to educate, to honor sacred

[2:56] places, and to take action towards real

[2:59] truth and reconciliation.

[3:01] Reg.

[3:05] We also wish to acknowledge the

[3:07] commitment of the residents of the

[3:08] Georgian Bay Township. We recognized

[3:11] that this municipality operates because

[3:12] of the financial support and

[3:14] volunteerism of a diverse community,

[3:16] including seasonal and full-time

[3:18] residents, volunteers, and businesses

[3:20] who sustain our services,

[3:22] infrastructure, staff, and local

[3:24] democracy. We all share common interest

[3:26] in having a transparent, fiscally

[3:28] responsible, well-governed municipality.

[3:32] council. The corporation, including its

[3:34] municipal staff, commit to serve with an

[3:36] accountability, fiscal responsibility,

[3:38] environmental stewardship to create a

[3:40] serviceoriented culture that focuses on

[3:42] helping and acting in the best interests

[3:45] of the community. Thank you,

[3:51] council. Any declarations of pecuniary

[3:53] interest or conflict of interest?

[3:59] Seeing none, I will let those who are

[4:02] online uh either in front of us on

[4:06] screen or observing us that we have in

[4:09] the the room here maybe 15 people in the

[4:12] audience um who will have an opportunity

[4:16] those who wish to speak will have that

[4:19] opportunity shortly

[4:27] this Morning. We are holding a special

[4:29] meeting of the planning council

[4:30] regarding the township's 2026 2028

[4:33] official plan comprehensive review and

[4:36] bill 98 new framework update. I'll

[4:39] briefly summarize the procedure that

[4:41] will be followed. First, the clerk will

[4:44] advise council when, how, and to whom

[4:46] notice of this special meeting was

[4:47] circulated. Staff will then provide an

[4:50] overview of the official plan

[4:51] comprehensive review, including how the

[4:54] review is proposed to take place in the

[4:56] new official plan framework resulting

[4:57] from recent changes to the planning act.

[5:01] Following the staff presentation,

[5:02] members of the public will have an

[5:04] opportunity to provide comments and ask

[5:06] questions regarding the review. We ask

[5:09] that comments remain relevant to the

[5:10] review and that speakers be respectful

[5:12] of everyone's opportunity to

[5:13] participate.

[5:15] Anyone wishing to speak is asked to

[5:17] state their name and address for the

[5:18] record and to sign in on the sheet

[5:20] provided.

[5:22] Following the public comments, members

[5:24] of council will have an opportunity to

[5:26] ask questions and provide comments.

[5:32] To our clerk,

[5:38] notice of this public meeting.

[5:42] Notice I'm sorry. The special public

[5:44] meeting of planning council was provided

[5:46] through multiple channels including the

[5:47] township's website, lobby, television,

[5:49] and email distribution to associations

[5:51] and external participants. The notice

[5:53] was circulated at least 30 days prior to

[5:55] this morning's meeting. This special

[5:57] meeting is being held under section 263

[5:59] of the planning act as part of the

[6:00] township's official plan comprehensive

[6:02] review. The purpose of today's meeting

[6:04] is to provide information regarding how

[6:06] the review will take place, discuss the

[6:08] new official plan framework resulting

[6:09] from recent amendments to the planning

[6:11] act, and receive comments and questions

[6:13] regarding the review from community,

[6:14] stakeholders, and residents. Everyone is

[6:17] encouraged to participate in the

[6:18] official plan comprehensive review.

[6:20] Comments may be provided during today's

[6:22] meeting or submitted to the township's

[6:23] planning department throughout the

[6:24] review process. Please note that all

[6:26] comments and submissions received will

[6:28] form part of the public record for

[6:30] review.

[6:32] Thank you very much. Um my brief summary

[6:36] of all that is this is where we open the

[6:38] door to the whole process that's going

[6:40] to take place over the next few years.

[6:42] So this is the door opening. Uh and so

[6:46] uh you know keep that in mind that this

[6:48] is by far not the only opportunity

[6:50] people will have to comment.

[6:54] >> Madame clerk any correspondence you wish

[6:57] to let us know about?

[6:58] >> No comments have been received yet. No

[7:00] correspondent. Okay.

[7:01] >> I'm now going to turn the uh meeting

[7:03] over to our township planner Jeff Kraki

[7:06] who will provide an overview of the

[7:07] official plan comprehensive review the

[7:10] process moving forward and the matters

[7:12] being considered through this review.

[7:18] Thank you Mr. Mayor and with your

[7:19] permission I will share my screen

[7:26] and I've run into a technical glitch. I

[7:28] thought sharing screen was already

[7:32] >> okay.

[7:47] Good morning everyone. My name is you've

[7:49] already heard is Jeff Kratkkey and I'm a

[7:51] planner here at the township of Georgian

[7:53] Bay. And although I've prepared a long

[7:56] report which everyone has the

[7:58] opportunity to read, I'm going to keep

[8:00] my comments today very brief because the

[8:03] main purpose of this meeting is to hear

[8:05] from you.

[8:07] But there were two other purposes for

[8:09] this meeting. And and the first was just

[8:11] to give the public a a very high level

[8:14] overview of what we're hoping to do

[8:17] during this review of our official plan.

[8:21] And again, as Derek I think has

[8:22] mentioned to the folks in the room, but

[8:24] I think everyone online will be hearing

[8:25] for the first time and the mayor has

[8:28] mentioned too, this is just the

[8:29] beginning. This is us opening the door

[8:31] to the public and to everyone, including

[8:34] indigenous communities and others to

[8:38] help us to find out what the new

[8:41] official plan for Georgian Bay will be.

[8:44] Um, and this conversation will continue

[8:48] for at least two more years, if not

[8:50] longer.

[8:52] Again, I think I've already talked about

[8:54] the purposes of this meeting, but just

[8:56] quickly there to discuss how this review

[8:58] is taking place, the new official plan

[9:01] framework required by Bill 98, and to

[9:04] hear from you.

[9:07] This review is taking place

[9:09] not just as the typical review and the

[9:12] typical review and official plan

[9:14] requires us to look at how the official

[9:16] plan remains

[9:20] in consistency with the PPS and

[9:23] conformity with the Muscoa official plan

[9:26] as well as with the community's

[9:28] aspirations, goals, desires, and

[9:32] intentions.

[9:34] But this one also requires us to look at

[9:36] this new official plan framework that

[9:38] has been required through the bill 98

[9:40] amendments to the planning act.

[9:43] I think importantly I need to apologize

[9:45] that the notice that is available

[9:47] electronically

[9:49] has an error in it. Um, I was trying to

[9:53] be as as helpful as I could uh by

[9:55] providing a direct link to the uh

[9:59] previous report regarding the official

[10:01] plan outline, but instead I provided a

[10:03] link to the wrong report. It's um the

[10:06] link that's in the notice goes to

[10:08] planning services report 2026 1220 sorry

[10:11] 122 when it should have gone to planning

[10:14] services staff report 2026125.

[10:19] Fortunately, the district is satisfied

[10:21] that because the other link above that

[10:23] direct link to the report goes to our

[10:26] review web page and on that review web

[10:29] page, the correct reports are linked

[10:32] that we are moving forward. But I just

[10:34] wanted to apologize to everyone for

[10:36] that. I think the other important thing

[10:39] that I really want to highlight is we

[10:41] don't have a newspaper.

[10:43] So, unfortunately, all of our notices

[10:47] will be given electronically. And what

[10:50] that means is that we're asking everyone

[10:52] to go to the township web pages and hit

[10:56] the subscribe button so that you receive

[10:59] an electronic notification when a notice

[11:02] is issued and you can look at it

[11:04] yourself once it's issued.

[11:10] Also, we've identified some preliminary

[11:12] topics, but again, these are just

[11:14] preliminary and if anyone feels the need

[11:19] to discuss things that we've not looked

[11:22] at on this preliminary list, we will be

[11:25] very happy to hear from you and to

[11:28] consider adding it to that list. And the

[11:30] preliminary list of topics was in the

[11:32] notice, but I think they bear repeating.

[11:34] environmental protection, indigenous

[11:37] engagement, new designations and

[11:40] schedules, policies for those new

[11:42] designations,

[11:44] and then the issue of how we are going

[11:47] to look at the relationship between the

[11:50] bill 98 new official plan framework and

[11:53] other certain aspects of our official

[11:56] plan's current relationship is still to

[11:58] be determined.

[12:00] water access

[12:02] levels

[12:04] and navigation and marinas,

[12:07] employment, commercial and resorts,

[12:10] housing,

[12:13] the Port Sever Village Center, which has

[12:15] been long planned but is still

[12:16] unrealized,

[12:18] the McTar boundary,

[12:22] recreational water quality,

[12:24] and big picture shoreline use and

[12:27] accessory buildings and structures.

[12:34] The other part of my presentation today

[12:36] is regarding bill 98 to the planning act

[12:39] and bill 98 has now amended the planning

[12:42] act. However, certain parts of that

[12:45] amendment have yet to be given effect by

[12:48] an order in council, and that really, I

[12:51] think, is likely leading to new

[12:54] regulations regarding how the official

[12:57] plan of the township relates to the

[12:59] district's official plan, the waterfront

[13:02] communities, and the site and area

[13:05] specific policies.

[13:07] So, we will still need to adapt our

[13:09] review and we do not know when the

[13:13] province will address this matter, only

[13:17] that they've highlighted it on the

[13:19] environmental registry.

[13:21] In addition, we're going to have to

[13:25] change the framework of our official

[13:27] plan. And so, the bulk of my report,

[13:29] which I'm not going to get into details

[13:31] because it's there, but if you have

[13:33] questions, I'm happy to answer them. The

[13:36] bulk of my report is really how do we

[13:39] fit the pieces of our current official

[13:42] plan into that new framework. And you

[13:45] will see duplications there. And that's

[13:48] intentional because there are instances

[13:51] where we have policies in one location

[13:54] in the official plan where they will now

[13:57] have to be in two locations and

[13:59] separated out. So essentially the

[14:01] policies will have to be unmarried from

[14:03] each other into

[14:06] the same meaning or perhaps slightly

[14:08] different meanings further to whatever

[14:10] we find in this review but they will

[14:14] need to be changed and what my report is

[14:16] meant to be is that starting point from

[14:19] where we do changes tracked. So the

[14:22] changes tracked versions that will

[14:24] follow will not represent that shuffling

[14:29] of the deck. I'll I'll call it that

[14:31] shuffling of the deck is represented by

[14:33] the tables and figures in this report.

[14:37] And so it is an important report um but

[14:41] it's also not the end. It is just the

[14:44] beginning.

[14:47] So, the next steps are going to, as I've

[14:50] said, go for many years, but the

[14:52] immediate next steps, hopefully during

[14:54] the rest of 2026,

[14:56] will be for everyone who's interested to

[14:58] subscribe on the township website.

[15:02] Number two, I will be preparing a report

[15:05] to bring back to council to discuss what

[15:08] planning staff heard at this meeting.

[15:12] And number three, we've already received

[15:15] through our outreach to um indigenous

[15:17] communities a request for a special

[15:21] meeting of council um to receive a

[15:24] presentation from the Mady Nation of

[15:26] Ontario and we will be holding that

[15:28] special meeting. Now I want to

[15:30] distinguish between special meetings

[15:33] today and the special meetings that may

[15:36] be may take place throughout the

[15:38] process. Today's special meeting is

[15:41] under a specific subsection of the

[15:43] planning act. Whereas the special

[15:46] meeting later this year will not be

[15:50] under the planning act. It's simply um

[15:52] not a typical council meeting.

[15:55] Therefore, it's called a special

[15:56] meeting, but it is not a 263 special

[16:00] meeting under the planning act. And I

[16:02] just want everyone to understand that.

[16:05] And again, our outreach to the

[16:07] indigenous communities and to the

[16:09] district staff as our approval authority

[16:11] will continue at every single step

[16:14] during the process.

[16:22] And I do I I'm sorry. I don't know what

[16:25] happened to my other slide. I did have

[16:27] one more slide with the resolution

[16:29] that's before council um which has been

[16:32] revised but as uh uh the mayor will read

[16:35] it later um I will uh leave it for him

[16:38] to deal with it. Thank you.

[16:42] >> All right. Thank you very much for that

[16:43] overview. Um, at this point I'm going to

[16:48] naively ask, are there any members of

[16:50] the public who wish to comment on this

[16:52] application on on this presentation? And

[16:56] you've already, as you've already heard

[16:57] from the clerk, um, please, you know,

[17:00] come forward and give us your name. I'm

[17:02] going to go first to the folks online

[17:04] because I see we have a number of people

[17:05] online and ask those online who are in

[17:09] the attendees category. If you wish to

[17:12] speak, please put up your hand and

[17:14] you'll be moved over because I recognize

[17:17] some of those names from the listing we

[17:19] have here. So, if anybody online who

[17:21] wishes to speak to this matter, please

[17:23] raise your hand and you'll be

[17:27] pulled on over.

[17:30] I think they're all getting a cup of

[17:31] coffee at the moment. In the meantime,

[17:34] anybody here want to lead off the

[17:35] discussion?

[17:41] Okay,

[17:44] the brave planner in the group.

[17:51] » Thank you, worship and members of

[17:52] council. My name is Jamie Robinson. I'm

[17:54] a planner and a partner with MHBC

[17:56] planning and Barry. Just a few I know

[17:58] this is section 26 meeting. So, it's

[18:00] really just identifying topics and areas

[18:03] for consideration through the OP review.

[18:06] Uh there's just a there's a few clients

[18:08] that I represent in the township of

[18:10] Georgian Bay that have identified some

[18:11] potential issues. Um I think you you

[18:14] wanted my name and add my address is 113

[18:17] Collier Street in Barry with MHBC. So

[18:20] just in terms of a couple of clients and

[18:23] a couple of uh comments. Firstly, uh I

[18:26] represent Ken Otto who's a property

[18:28] owner on Six Mile Lake. One thing he

[18:31] would like considered through the OP

[18:33] review is strengthening of the narrow

[18:35] water body policies within the

[18:36] township's OP specifically to make it

[18:39] very clear that these areas are

[18:41] distinguished from other areas where

[18:43] there aren't narrow water bodies that

[18:45] there's greater development restrictions

[18:47] placed on those areas. Um he's recently

[18:50] gone through an OOLT hearing related to

[18:52] that matter and we believe there needs

[18:53] to be a strengthening of policies to to

[18:56] make it very clear for everybody

[18:57] involved what the the rules are with

[19:00] respect to development on narrow water

[19:02] bodies.

[19:04] Uh secondly, two property owners on

[19:07] Georgian Bay, Mr. Campbell Oller and

[19:10] Eric Lamond. They would just like to

[19:12] make sure that there's policies in place

[19:14] with respect to or continue to be

[19:17] policies with respect to access and

[19:19] changing water levels and providing

[19:21] permissions and direction to the zoning

[19:23] bylaw to allow for dock increases,

[19:27] dock length increases or potentially

[19:29] shifting of dock locations without going

[19:32] through a planning approvals process to

[19:34] do so to address changing water levels

[19:37] and the access considerations on

[19:38] Georgian Okay.

[19:41] Uh thirdly, I represent Oak Bay

[19:45] Developments as well and would like they

[19:47] would like to see some policies

[19:49] considered within the OP to implement

[19:52] direction in the planning act with

[19:53] respect to um delegation of approval

[19:56] authorities to staff in some regards

[19:59] specifically related to the removal of

[20:00] holding symbols and uh other options to

[20:04] potentially expedite

[20:06] development approvals where there's

[20:08] technical considerations at play which

[20:10] really aren't which are supported by

[20:13] evidence or supported by material from

[20:16] experts whether it's um engineering

[20:19] experts or whether it's um environmental

[20:22] experts. Uh they feel that that there's

[20:25] technical considerations involved. Those

[20:27] should be delegated to staff as a propo

[20:29] as opposed to a council approval. The

[20:32] planning act does allow for that now and

[20:34] it's something that would help uh move

[20:36] development

[20:37] uh forward quicker where technical

[20:40] requirements have been met.

[20:44] Uh I also represent Hall's Cottages uh

[20:48] and the Delawana Inn and then also

[20:52] Picnic Island Resort in Kenquino.

[20:55] They would like to see some polic

[20:57] combined. and they would like to see

[20:58] policies in the official plan that um

[21:01] encourage redevelopment of existing

[21:04] resort properties.

[21:06] And through that, one mechanism they'd

[21:08] like considered is potential operate

[21:11] opportunities

[21:12] and clarity in the policies surrounding

[21:15] residential being permitted as a

[21:18] component of redevelopment of resort

[21:20] properties. Um with respect to that

[21:23] comment, it is important to maintain the

[21:26] commercial function of those of existing

[21:28] resort properties. However, we believe

[21:31] that commercial function can still be

[21:34] maintained and in some cases enhanced

[21:36] through uh additional residential

[21:40] opportunities on those sites. One

[21:42] example I'll just provide is that u from

[21:45] a lending perspective, banks are um not likely to lend money for commercial

[21:55] redevelopment, but they will lend money

[21:57] for residential development. So where

[22:00] there's a portion of the site that's

[22:02] available for residential, that could be

[22:04] an influx of cash into the into the

[22:07] redevelopment proposal from outside

[22:09] sources, which could benefit the

[22:12] commercial aspect too by bringing more

[22:14] people and allowing for reinvestment in

[22:15] the commercial portion. So the main

[22:18] comment there is council we'd recommend

[22:20] be considerate of the economics at play

[22:25] for these redevelopments of existing

[22:28] commercial resort properties and um

[22:31] ensuring that the policies recognize the

[22:34] economic function these properties have

[22:36] historically provided and can can

[22:39] hopefully be enhanced over time.

[22:43] Um also like to comment on behalf of 117

[22:47] Port 7 Road which is the redevelopment

[22:49] that's happening at the uh Sunny Lee

[22:51] Cottages and they own some abuing

[22:53] property as well. Just through the

[22:56] experience and the redevelopment of of

[22:58] that property and going through the

[23:00] planning approvals process with those

[23:01] folks. um really it's sort of the first

[23:06] redevelopment proposal we've seen in

[23:08] Port Severign and and um so there's I I

[23:12] think obviously some lessons learned

[23:13] from that that can can help the

[23:16] municipality going forward. So, one of

[23:19] those is and one of those comments is

[23:22] specifically that uh an updated policy

[23:25] framework within Port Severign in the

[23:28] community to really recognize the

[23:30] differences the key differences of of

[23:33] redevelopment within a settlement area

[23:36] versus outside of a settlement area. um

[23:39] recognize that there's different

[23:41] considerations at play and key values or

[23:44] key instances, key opportunities within

[23:47] settlement areas versus outside of

[23:48] settlement areas. and uh looking for

[23:53] potential opportunities to expedite

[23:56] those settlement area approvals as well.

[23:59] um to reduce reduce time, but make sure

[24:03] still that those technical requirements

[24:05] are met to the best uh are met to ensure

[24:08] we have protection of the water body and

[24:10] protection of the shoreline and and

[24:12] really looking for a net improvement

[24:14] overall from a an environmental

[24:16] perspective, but still allowing for that

[24:19] influx of of

[24:21] um

[24:23] of redevelopment that will assist the

[24:25] economy and the local businesses within

[24:27] the community. So, with that, sorry for

[24:29] the long-windedness, but that's a sort

[24:31] of summary of uh of the clients that I

[24:33] represent uh currently that have

[24:36] requested that comments be made on on at

[24:39] this section 26 meeting. So, we'll

[24:42] provide something in writing to staff as

[24:44] well. It's for consideration going

[24:45] forward. Thank you.

[24:46] >> Well, thank you very much for those uh

[24:48] half dozen points.

[24:50] Um I've not seen any hands yet raised

[24:53] online, so I'll say who else who wants

[24:55] to volunteer next to come forward.

[24:59] Mr. Bean,

[25:15] » can you just Can you just push the

[25:17] silver button there to light?

[25:19] >> There we go. for [clears throat]

[25:22] good morning, Mayor Coot here, members

[25:25] of council, senior staff. Uh my name is

[25:28] Tom Bane. I'm here today uh representing

[25:32] the Eastern Georgia Bay Protective

[25:34] Society. Um

[25:37] I am going to make a presentation on

[25:39] environmental protection and water

[25:42] quality uh in the township of Georgian

[25:44] Bay over the last 70 years.

[25:48] of and it's my story. Um a

[25:52] number of years ago I read a book

[25:54] entitled CD How by Robert Boswell and

[25:57] William Kilbornne. CD How was Minister

[26:00] of Municip in the Mackenzie Kings

[26:03] government during the Second World War years and early 50s.

[26:09] I I spoke about how's enjoyment of peace

[26:11] and solitude after boarding one of the

[26:13] CPR boats at Port McNickel and traveling

[26:16] north on Georgian Bay and Lake Superior

[26:18] to his constituency in Fort William Port

[26:21] Arthur, now called Thunder Bay.

[26:25] When I was a young fellow, I used to

[26:26] travel my small boat to Bowley Bay and

[26:29] watch the CPR boats leaving Port

[26:31] McNickel and begin their travel north

[26:34] through the gap between Bowley Island

[26:36] and the mainland. The boats were dark

[26:38] green in color with black smoke stacks

[26:40] and belch black smoke from burning coal.

[26:44] One day I noticed a huge flock of

[26:46] seagulls following one of the CPR boats.

[26:49] On inspection, I found the surface of

[26:51] Georgia Bay littered with both kitchen

[26:53] waste uh and uh human waste.

[26:57] However, people in the know at the time

[26:59] told me not to worry that Georgian Bay

[27:03] had great powers of dilution and there

[27:06] were aquatic creatures that would eat

[27:08] and clean up what was left over. And I I should not be too concerned. That was

[27:14] 70 years ago.

[27:19] In 1993, the Eastern Georgia Bay

[27:21] Protective Society was formed.

[27:23] Originally named the Honey Harbor Patrol

[27:25] incorporated and beame began surface

[27:28] water and bottom sediment sampling and

[27:30] testing. We tested a range of pathogens

[27:33] including total caulifforms, ficoforms,

[27:36] E.coli, entricoxy and sudamonus organosa

[27:40] to achieve consistency and reliability.

[27:43] In 1994,95 and 96, the Eastern Georgia

[27:46] Bay Protector Society collaborated with

[27:48] the University of Toronto Department of

[27:51] Microbiology, Dr. Pat Cipherid, and the

[27:53] Department of Bioatistics, Dr. Bernard

[27:55] Choy, to sample and test 22 live aboard

[28:00] boat anchorages from Honey Harbor to

[28:02] Good Harbor, Good Harbors north of Perry

[28:04] Sound.

[28:05] Sampling both surface water and bottom

[28:07] sediment was done twice a week, Sundays

[28:09] and Wednesdays for 10 weeks for three

[28:11] years. Testing was done for five

[28:14] pathogens and yielded over 6,000 data

[28:17] points for statistical analysis. The

[28:19] University of Toronto reported an

[28:21] absolute correlation between pathogens

[28:23] in the surface water and the presence of

[28:25] liverboard boats. The Georgian Bay

[28:28] Association unfortunately rejected the

[28:30] University of Toronto conclusions and

[28:32] thought the voters could be convinced

[28:34] not to dump their gray water. That

[28:37] program over three years cost $240,000.

[28:42] In 1997 and 1998, the Eastern Georgia

[28:45] Bay Protector Society conducted over 700

[28:48] on-site septics inspections using

[28:50] students trained by the Ontario Ministry

[28:53] of Housing in Honey Harbor, Cognine, and

[28:56] Gohome Bay with property owners

[28:58] permission.

[28:59] There were many non-compliant and

[29:01] defective systems. The data was provided

[29:03] to the township of Georgian Bay, but no

[29:05] follow-up action was taken.

[29:08] In 1998, the Georgia Bay [clears throat]

[29:11] Protective Society met with the

[29:12] Honorable Norm Sterling, Minister of the

[29:14] Environment.

[29:16] Minister Sterling told us that we should

[29:17] find a solution to the gray water

[29:19] problem and the septic problem and not

[29:21] to continue to complain about it. In

[29:24] response to the University of Toronto

[29:26] report, the Township of Georgian Bay

[29:28] passed bylaw 95-78

[29:30] to rec [clears throat] to regulate the

[29:33] dumping of gray water into Georgian Bay.

[29:35] It's called the graywater bylaw.

[29:38] However, the Ontario Ministry of

[29:39] Environment deemed the new bylaw to be

[29:41] uninforceable because it was contrary to

[29:44] Ontario Regulation 343, which allowed

[29:46] the dumping of gray water. On October

[29:49] the 15th, 1999, Mayor Michael Kennedy

[29:52] wrote to the honor honorable Tony

[29:54] Clement, Minister of the Environment,

[29:56] and pleaded with him to amend Ontario

[29:58] Regulation 393. There was no response.

[30:03] In the year 2000, the Eastern Georgia

[30:05] Bay Protective Society formed the Great

[30:07] Lakes Clean Water Limited Partnership to

[30:10] find solutions to the graywater problem

[30:12] with libertar boats and septic system

[30:15] problems at waterfront cottages. $3

[30:18] million was raised from investors to

[30:20] develop new technology. In 2005 or 2006,

[30:24] we received netty evaluation from the

[30:26] Ontario Ministry of the Environment. In

[30:29] 2012, we received Canada ETV

[30:32] verification from Environment Canada. In

[30:35] 2017, we received validation from

[30:38] Fleming College at Trent University

[30:40] Center for Alternative Wastewater

[30:42] Treatment after 5 years of on-site

[30:44] testing.

[30:46] As well, we achieved compliance with NSF

[30:48] 350 for wastewater reuse.

[30:52] In 2018, the Ontario Ministry of Housing

[30:56] Water Technology Acceleration Project

[30:58] rejected our application under the

[31:00] Ontario Building Code Part and suggested

[31:03] we start in California or perhaps uh in

[31:06] China but not Ontario. We were told this

[31:09] was to protect the jobs of tree cutters,

[31:12] the excavators, the sand and gravel

[31:14] haulers and the septic installers. We

[31:17] simply did not understand

[31:21] the politics of the Ford government on

[31:23] how to get acceptance and approval.

[31:28] In [clears throat] recent years, the

[31:29] government of Canada has allowed small

[31:30] cruise ships to ply the waters of the

[31:32] Great Lakes, including Georgian Bay, in

[31:35] the summer months. We know we all know

[31:37] the the Pearl Mist that stops in

[31:39] Midland. These small cruise ships ply

[31:42] the salt waters of the Caribbean and

[31:43] elsewhere during the winter months.

[31:46] These ships have wastewater treatment

[31:47] systems that are based on ionization

[31:50] using salt water as a medium.

[31:53] [clears throat]

[31:54] These systems do not function using

[31:56] fresh water. In spite of this, the

[31:58] government of Canada allows these cruise

[32:00] ships to dump essentially untreated

[32:02] sewage into Georgian Bay as long as they

[32:05] are two kilometers offshore.

[32:08] The Georgia Boy Association has been

[32:10] following the conduct of this for

[32:11] several years and has been unable to

[32:14] receive answers to their questions from

[32:16] the bureaucracy.

[32:18] In 2021, the Ontario Ministry of

[32:20] Environment, Conservation, and Parks

[32:22] issued a certificate of for approval for

[32:25] a marina in Honey Harbor to cond to

[32:29] [clears throat]

[32:30] uh treat sewage uh to conduct to sorry

[32:33] to construct a sewage work to treat

[32:35] concentrated sewage from 135 resident

[32:39] livid boats in an unlimited number of

[32:41] transient livboard boats. It is big

[32:44] enough to support a two-bedroom cottage

[32:46] and there are no requirements for

[32:48] reduction of either pathogens or

[32:49] nutrients, only a discharge limit of

[32:52] 1,000 liters per day. In fact, the

[32:54] system discharges unknown unknown

[32:57] unlimited volume of untreated sewage

[32:59] from liverboard boats each day. The

[33:02] surrounding waters have total phosphorus

[33:04] levels of concentrations 10 times the

[33:06] background levels. [clears throat] And

[33:08] this is what breeds

[33:11] uh blue green algae blooms. and ammonia

[33:13] levels are are such not ever seen before

[33:16] in Georgian Bay.

[33:20] In 2022, the Eastern Georgia Bay

[33:22] Protective Society attempted to oppose

[33:24] uh the Township of Georgia Bay site plan

[33:27] amendment for the sewage works at this

[33:29] location uh at the Ontario Lanch Rio,

[33:32] but was kicked out by politically

[33:34] motivated decision. The township of

[33:37] Georgia Bay did not defend.

[33:39] In 2023, the Eastern Georgia Bay

[33:41] Protective Society began [clears throat]

[33:43] concent began to see concentrations of

[33:47] total caulifforms in E.coli in the

[33:48] surface waters of Honey Harbor not seen

[33:50] before in over 30 years of sampling and

[33:52] testing. This continued in 24,25 and 26.

[33:56] It is thought to be the cumulative

[33:58] result of anthrop [clears throat]

[34:00] anthropogenic sources over many years

[34:03] and the effects of climate change. In

[34:05] 2025, proposed park model development at

[34:09] Basy Bay was finally abandoned after 10

[34:12] years of opposition by Gina Marco, the

[34:14] Eastern Georgia Bay Protector Society

[34:16] and supported by the Georgian Bay

[34:18] Association and the Cognitine Cottagers

[34:20] Association.

[34:22] This endeavor cost over a million

[34:23] dollars and there was little help from

[34:25] the Township of Georgian Bay. In 2025

[34:28] and 2026,

[34:30] [clears throat]

[34:31] the Eastern Georgia Bay Protective Side

[34:34] may draft applications to the Township

[34:36] of Georgia Bay for official for an

[34:38] official plan amendment and zoning bylaw

[34:40] amendment for protection of nearshore

[34:42] waters of the Township of Georgia Bay.

[34:45] Both applications were rejected by

[34:47] Township of Georgia Bay planning

[34:49] department saying they were quote akin

[34:51] to recital to a resolution rather than

[34:54] policy guidance. We are now asking Alan

[34:57] Ramsey, a well-known planner, to revise

[35:00] the wording to planner speak.

[35:03] Many years ago, I watched a movie called

[35:05] Cool Hand Luke, which starred Paul Lumin

[35:08] as Luke. [clears throat]

[35:10] Just before the prison warden shot Luke,

[35:12] he said, "What we have here is a failure

[35:15] to communicate."

[35:18] Ladies and gentlemen, what we have here

[35:19] today is a failure to protect the water

[35:21] in the township of Georgian Bay. It is

[35:24] you

[35:26] who need to listen and need to act and

[35:29] need to protect our most precious

[35:30] resource.

[35:33] The Abby water sampling and testing

[35:35] currently being conducted by the a

[35:37] dedicated group of citizen volunteers in

[35:40] the township of Georgia Bay while

[35:41] interesting does not comply with Ontario

[35:44] government legislation, regulations,

[35:46] guidelines, publications and there is no

[35:49] enforcement possible. What I have

[35:51] proposed in both the official plan

[35:53] amendment and the zoning by amendment

[35:55] contains nothing new. All of its

[35:58] contents are found in Ontario government

[36:00] legislation, regulations, guidelines,

[36:02] and publications. I would be very

[36:05] pleased to have your support to my

[36:07] proposal. Thank you.

[36:10] >> Thank you very much.

[36:11] >> Questions? Any questions?

[36:13] >> Will you be sharing that that

[36:14] documentation with our planning

[36:16] department? Uh I have a copy here for uh

[36:18] the clerk and I'll give it to her now.

[36:21] >> Appreciate that. Thank you very much.

[36:28] » Does anyone else wish to speak?

[36:30] >> Your worship. Uh Mr. Bane asked if there

[36:32] was anybody who would like to ask

[36:34] questions. Would that be a part of

[36:35] council discussion?

[36:36] >> If you if you like at this point, go

[36:38] ahead. Thank you. And through you,

[36:39] chair. Uh to Mr. Tom Bane.

[36:43] There he is. Uh thank you, Mr. Bane over

[36:46] the years you've been an advocate for

[36:48] clean water. I've been to many meetings

[36:49] that you've had and uh you certainly are

[36:52] a champion towards that. My one question

[36:55] in your presentation was about live

[36:57] aboard boats. Um I happen to have a live

[37:01] aboard boat. I live in the township of

[37:03] Port Sever and uh upon occasion

[37:08] everything goes into a holding tank.

[37:11] Then the holding tank is is um sucked

[37:14] out by a truck and then it's taken to

[37:17] the water purification plant and

[37:19] filtered before discharge. Um,

[37:23] I think most of the marinas have that

[37:25] practice. At least I hope they do. But

[37:29] it's something I think that needs to be

[37:31] investigated a little bit more. Um,

[37:36] and uh how the planning department would

[37:38] deal that would would be a very good

[37:41] question for me and I will deal with

[37:43] that with the planning department. But

[37:44] um something that um definitely needs to

[37:47] be uh researched and is of importance

[37:51] then we'll we'll try and make something

[37:52] happen.

[37:54] Thank you uh councelor Bochuk. U

[37:57] [clears throat] there there are two

[37:59] components uh uh of sewage uh on a

[38:03] liward boat. There's black water and

[38:05] there's gray water. Under

[38:07] [clears throat] current legislation,

[38:10] black water is required to be retained

[38:12] as UFA suggested and pumped out at the

[38:14] marina. And I I think that is quite

[38:17] effectively being done. Okay. But under

[38:19] current regulations, gray water, okay,

[38:22] which is basically uh water from the uh

[38:25] the shower, uh from the the kitchen

[38:27] sink, uh from other activities, the BGE

[38:30] can be dumped into into Georgia Bay

[38:32] under regulation 343.

[38:36] and uh uh ba based on uh my current

[38:39] information that it is being done.

[38:42] >> Thank you and and through you chair. Uh

[38:44] I appreciate those comments and um I

[38:48] believe you're you're right that um the

[38:51] black water is held in tanks and the

[38:53] gray water can be released into the

[38:56] environment.

[38:57] >> That's right. The can the can the can's

[39:00] a good word.

[39:01] >> Yeah, it can be. So um again, thank you

[39:03] for your comments. I think we can use it

[39:05] and be quite constructive working

[39:07] together with our planning department.

[39:08] Thanks.

[39:09] >> Thank you, counselor.

[39:09] >> Appreciate it.

[39:10] >> Any other questions?

[39:12] >> Thank you. Thank you for listening.

[39:14] >> Thank you. There's no doubt there's a

[39:16] double standard between um I'll call

[39:19] township regulations and provincial

[39:21] regulations when it comes to gray water,

[39:24] but I won't get into my editorial on

[39:25] that at this point.

[39:27] Anybody else who wishes to comment? And

[39:30] I'm again I'm going to remind anybody

[39:32] online if you wish to comment you'd have

[39:34] to raise your hand so we can move you

[39:35] over. But in the meantime in our

[39:38] audience sir

[39:47] good morning sir um planners and all. My

[39:50] name is Bill Walksmith and I'm on island

[39:53] 1900 uh out in Cognine. Um your worship

[39:57] you mentioned something about a signin

[39:58] sheet here. I did not see one. Oh,

[40:02] sorry.

[40:04] Um, I'm also on the planning committee

[40:06] of the Cognition Cottages Association

[40:08] and I'd really like to talk to a couple

[40:10] of issues here today if I could. And the

[40:13] one is the importance of the community

[40:15] plans. And while I re realized from uh

[40:18] the earlier presentation that there's

[40:21] still some work to be done on it, but I

[40:24] think it's very important and I think

[40:26] council needs to know that those

[40:28] community plans are there that different

[40:31] areas within the township have very

[40:34] different and diverse views. The

[40:35] diversity is there and we need to make

[40:38] sure that those plans and the things in

[40:41] them continue on when the new plan is

[40:44] developed. And we want to I want to just

[40:47] emphasize how much it's important that

[40:49] we keep those community plans in place.

[40:51] The township is too big of a pl

[40:53] [clears throat] excuse me too big of a

[40:55] place for a one-sizefits-all and we

[40:58] really need to make sure that we get

[41:00] that diversity there. And the other one

[41:02] that I wanted to talk briefly about and

[41:04] while it may not be specific to the

[41:06] official plan is the issue of compliance

[41:10] is compliance with the plan. There's a

[41:14] lot of things happening out there that I

[41:17] don't think it's necessarily

[41:20] people's the individual cottages, the

[41:22] individual property owners. I think

[41:24] there is some room there for the

[41:26] township and in the plan to monitor

[41:28] compliance in particular. I mean, in

[41:30] fact, the one of the reasons that I got

[41:32] involved with the planning process was

[41:35] the fact that there was um an amendment

[41:38] made and there were conditions put on

[41:40] that amendment and those conditions

[41:42] weren't met until until I brought it up

[41:45] and asked that. So I think it's

[41:46] important that staff both in the

[41:49] planning uh building permits by law

[41:53] enforcement that they become aware of

[41:56] the conditions that are put when things

[41:58] happen or the conditions in the uh

[42:00] official plan and the bylaws and that

[42:02] they be followed on a regular basis and

[42:05] not left up as a complaint uh situation.

[42:08] So those are really the two things is I

[42:10] think we need to have more compliance

[42:12] and I think we really need to keep the

[42:14] community plans in place. Thank you very

[42:16] much.

[42:18] >> Just just for your interest last week uh

[42:21] I was with CO Mariotti at the um

[42:24] Association of Municipalities Ontario

[42:26] annual conference and and we made a

[42:28] presentation to the ministry about the

[42:30] importance of community plans. They just

[42:33] have one they their whole format just

[42:35] says waterfront full stop and we're

[42:38] saying yeah well we need subsets within

[42:40] that and we got a favorable reception

[42:42] doesn't mean that they're going to

[42:44] respond the way we want but yes we we

[42:47] understand very well that the the

[42:50] differences in our waterfronts depending

[42:51] upon where you are in the township.

[42:53] >> Yes. And it's just I don't believe a

[42:54] one-sizefits-all and I think the

[42:56] community plans have worked very well in

[42:57] the past and hope that they will be able

[42:59] to be somehow be worked into the new

[43:01] official plan. Thank you.

[43:02] >> And I'd also like to thank the staff

[43:03] that they've been very helpful whenever

[43:05] I've been trying to uh bring forward

[43:07] some issues. Thank you.

[43:08] >> Well, thanks for that, too.

[43:10] >> Yes.

[43:12] Thank you to the mayor. Bill, I just uh

[43:14] it's great to see you here. Thank you

[43:15] for being here. Um I I know that there

[43:17] will be a reach out from the planning

[43:20] department to cottage associations and

[43:22] other associations,

[43:24] lake associations, etc. And I'm doing I

[43:27] hoping that you and other members of the

[43:30] CCA planning group uh plan on

[43:33] participating in and providing input uh

[43:36] when that is requested from the planning

[43:38] department.

[43:38] >> I'm sure they are and I suspect that

[43:40] there's other members of the planning

[43:41] committee that are probably watching me

[43:42] saying thank you going for going first

[43:44] bill.

[43:45] >> Anyway, it's great to see you.

[43:46] >> Thank you,

[43:48] >> Director Whit.

[43:50] Thank you your worship. And if I may f

[43:53] Thanks, Bill. Um um further to Mr.

[43:56] Watsmouth's comments, you know, this official plan which is the

[44:00] fundamental guiding document for land

[44:02] use in the municipality, it affects land

[44:04] use, it affects economic development,

[44:07] protection of natural features,

[44:08] protection of those sacred places that

[44:10] the bear the mayor mentioned. Um and the

[44:14] current official plan has been in effect

[44:16] since 2014.

[44:19] Um and uh it was our intent when we

[44:22] embarked on this process um to take that

[44:25] official plan which we think has been

[44:27] working well and it was developed with

[44:29] much consultation with the communities

[44:32] um you know to improve upon it. We've

[44:34] been driving this car for 12 years now

[44:37] called the official plan and we wanted

[44:38] to tune it up. Um and then the province

[44:42] uh brought in Bill 98 which uh we're working proactively to conform to

[44:49] Bill 98 and the standard that the

[44:51] province has now set for official plans.

[44:53] So um as part of that process and the

[44:55] mayor mentioned the deputation um to the ministry municipal affairs, we

[45:01] definitely want to preserve those um

[45:03] community plans. Um I'm also super

[45:06] thrilled with the feedback that I'm

[45:07] hearing so far. As Jeff mentioned, this

[45:10] is our first opportunity to go formally

[45:12] to the public um to really cast a really

[45:17] broad net to say, "Okay, um we as staff

[45:21] um with the help of council have

[45:23] identified what we think are topics that

[45:26] are important for the community and that

[45:29] um we should be looking at. But this is

[45:30] the opportunity to hear from you the

[45:33] public to understand are there other

[45:36] topics that we need to look at that we

[45:38] haven't captured yet or drill down into

[45:41] the topics we have identified as some of

[45:43] you have already spoken to. So, um,

[45:45] thanks for that. And, um, what will come

[45:48] of this is, uh, a better official plan,

[45:52] um, that better addresses these

[45:54] important land use issues and hopefully

[45:56] captures as much as we possibly can, um,

[46:00] the concerns that everyone's identified.

[46:02] As, as some of you have already pointed

[46:04] out, there are different levels of

[46:05] government, there are different

[46:06] jurisdictions, right? and and uh we have

[46:09] certain powers and we're certainly going

[46:11] to try to work we will work within the

[46:13] powers that we have. Um but we will also

[46:16] work with other levels of government

[46:18] where we can to also bring about change

[46:20] that the community is seeking. So I just

[46:22] wanted to give that little bit of

[46:23] context about what an official plan is

[46:26] um how we got here and why we're here

[46:28] today. So keep the feedback coming and

[46:30] thank you for the time Mr. Mayor.

[46:32] >> Well I'm only going to add one extra

[46:34] thing and that's you said this is the

[46:35] opportunity to bring this up. No, this

[46:37] is the first opportunity because and I

[46:40] strongly encourage anybody here or who's

[46:42] watching or who may watch later. If you

[46:45] if there's things that you think are

[46:47] very important to consider, please send

[46:49] a note or contact Mr. Kraki um and uh or

[46:54] anybody else in the planning department

[46:56] or on council. Doesn't matter who you contact initially. Um I say this is

[47:01] opening the door. Uh when the meeting's

[47:02] over, the door is still open.

[47:05] All right. next.

[47:13] Go ahead, please.

[47:21] There we go. [laughter] There's a red

[47:23] light. Does that mean we stop or start?

[47:27] >> Okay, [laughter]

[47:28] I'll try to stop and start quickly. Um,

[47:31] good morning, Mayor Coocher and

[47:33] counselors and staff and and interested

[47:36] citizens. My name is Naomi Emmed. I'm a

[47:38] permanent resident of Gloucester Pool um

[47:41] involved

[47:43] member of the community and um I'm here

[47:45] really just

[47:47] to to learn from the beginning. I I

[47:50] apologize I haven't read the anything

[47:52] that was online other than the

[47:54] announcement of this meeting. Um but the

[47:58] two and the the points that you went

[48:00] through uh quickly and I appreciate

[48:03] that. Um all of them seemed important.

[48:07] Um but I was particularly interested in

[48:09] housing and whether there was any um and

[48:14] that's fleshed out in in your planning

[48:17] if there's a specific reference to

[48:19] affordable housing.

[48:21] um

[48:23] something that I is near and dear to my

[48:25] heart. Um and the other one was the uh

[48:30] addressing of the port severed

[48:32] community. So is it I'm really asking

[48:35] two questions more than I'm

[48:38] um

[48:41] yeah I'm asking those two questions.

[48:44] >> Mr. Cracky

[48:44] >> with your permission Mr.

[48:46] Um

[48:48] the brief answer with respect to housing

[48:50] and especially affordable housing is

[48:52] that is I would say one of the areas in

[48:55] which our current official plan can be

[48:58] improved. And so a normal review I think

[49:01] would have addressed those matters. Um

[49:04] but now we're also going to be looking

[49:06] at relocating some of those policies.

[49:09] But no, that is we do not yet have a

[49:11] start. on a preliminary basis. That may

[49:15] be one of the locations in our official

[49:18] plan um in which we may seek um

[49:21] additional assistance from an expert,

[49:24] but that's to be determined. I think we

[49:26] want to start the discussion with the

[49:28] community before we decide that we need

[49:30] assistance. I think your second question

[49:33] is much the same as the last uh person

[49:37] speaking with respect to this notion of

[49:40] secondary plans. And while the province

[49:43] at AMO and on the environmental registry

[49:46] has demonstrated their understanding

[49:49] that this is an important matter not

[49:50] just to Georgian Bay Township but to

[49:53] many municipalities.

[49:55] They haven't yet given us any indication

[49:58] as to how they may address it. What I

[50:03] will say is the good news is that they

[50:05] have left

[50:07] those parts of the um planning act

[50:10] amendments that were made by Bill 98 in

[50:12] a gray if you look on EAWS. And what

[50:15] that traditionally means is that they

[50:18] are going to address something through

[50:20] regulation. And again, in the

[50:22] environmental registry posting that's in

[50:24] my report, you can click on that and go

[50:26] directly to that posting on the

[50:28] environmental registry. They do describe

[50:30] the issue and I think they've heard us

[50:34] as planners, people, councils. I think

[50:38] we're all just kept in suspense um until

[50:43] perhaps the house returns in November.

[50:48] So just to clarify um what I was

[50:50] addressing is the uh longstanding

[50:54] um

[50:56] initiative. I think it b dates back to

[50:59] the mid 1990s

[51:01] uh when the Brazette house was moved to

[51:04] um its present location and uh the the

[51:08] barn and then the comm community the

[51:11] community services building was built

[51:13] and the new township office. And during

[51:15] all of that, there was an initiative to

[51:19] create a a more identifiable port

[51:23] severing center um with connecting

[51:27] pathways and um so that it presented

[51:31] more as a unified community and there's

[51:34] been a lot of efforts on the part of the

[51:36] historical society and and Sig Bay and

[51:40] um you know local port people, but it's

[51:44] never

[51:45] complete been completed. So that was the

[51:48] bullet that I was particularly

[51:50] interested in.

[51:51] >> So most recently that has been included

[51:54] through our official plan as what's

[51:56] called the port 7 um

[52:00] urban design guidelines and village

[52:04] center plan essentially. I can't recall

[52:06] the exact title. Um, but you're correct.

[52:09] There's only really been the government

[52:12] investments so far with respect to the

[52:14] preset house, this building, the

[52:16] library, um, the bridge, the park, uh,

[52:21] some street lighting, and some portions

[52:25] of sidewalks. And that's so Oh, and the

[52:28] boulevard on Lone Pine Road, uh, with

[52:31] the, uh, flowers and trees, etc.

[52:35] But thus far that has been the extent of

[52:37] the implementation. We do now have

[52:39] before uh council and with staff a

[52:43] proposed development that would be the

[52:45] first um as was mentioned by the

[52:48] consultant working for the developer to

[52:50] begin to implement that. The way the

[52:53] province wrote on the environmental

[52:54] registry is that they they don't agree

[52:59] with the current approach of our

[53:01] official plan and the way those um

[53:03] policies are being uh provided.

[53:07] And what they've written on the

[53:09] environmental registry essentially is

[53:10] that we would have a secondary planning

[53:14] document that would include those

[53:16] policies as opposed to a guideline and

[53:20] then policies in the official plan. But

[53:23] they haven't actually provided any

[53:27] further discussion other than just

[53:29] saying this is where we may go. Um, so

[53:33] we do not know that that is where they

[53:36] are going to go and they may go nowhere.

[53:40] We really simply do not know. My hope is

[53:45] that when Parliament when the House at

[53:48] Queens Park returns uh that we will very

[53:51] quickly be given some draft regulations

[53:54] to see and get a better understanding as

[53:57] to where the Ontario government will go.

[53:59] But rest assured, I think planning staff

[54:02] can say with great certainty that we

[54:04] appreciate how important these

[54:08] um additional refinements to our

[54:10] official plan are not only for people in

[54:12] Port Sever, but to people in the

[54:14] waterfront communities on Georgia Bay,

[54:16] to people in the waterfront communities

[54:19] community around six mile lake. And

[54:22] I don't want to go to a place yet where

[54:25] we have to look at how do we how do we

[54:27] make this fit the structure we've been

[54:31] given so far because I'm hopeful that

[54:34] something is still to come. But we will

[54:37] as staff explore whatever we need to

[54:40] explore to make sure that those policies

[54:44] come forward are reviewed are updated.

[54:46] So again, I think one of the topics is

[54:48] that Port 7 village center and I think

[54:53] it was great to hear from from uh MHPC

[54:56] representing the developer of one of

[54:58] those lands. Um, it's great to hear from

[55:01] you and I hope we can bring everyone

[55:04] together throughout this process to

[55:07] discuss that in a way that will truly

[55:09] achieve what what this community has for

[55:12] so long hoped would be achieved for the

[55:15] Port Sever Village Center.

[55:17] >> Well, please keep us posted on how we

[55:19] can help.

[55:20] >> Well, again, um, send me a quick email

[55:23] just saying you want to help and be

[55:25] involved and I'll I'll keep you

[55:27] involved. You will get the email this

[55:30] afternoon, sir.

[55:30] >> Great. Okay. Um, thank you,

[55:32] >> Director Whit. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Yeah,

[55:35] further to what what Jeff said that that

[55:36] master plan, those urban design

[55:38] guidelines that sounds like you were

[55:39] very much involved in um or or or

[55:42] followed are are very much something

[55:44] that from our standpoint so far, um, we

[55:47] have every intention of keeping. We

[55:49] certainly want to look at them to ensure

[55:51] that the policies are still current and if there's anything that needs

[55:55] updating or improving, that that's

[55:56] great. But um um Jeff mentioned, you

[55:59] know, there's sort of two components to

[56:01] seeing these things come to realization.

[56:04] There's those elements that are within

[56:06] the the public realm, the government

[56:08] realm, road improvements and and

[56:11] initiatives like some, you know, the

[56:13] work that's been done with the Brassette

[56:14] House, etc. Um and then there's the

[56:17] responsibility that we as as planners

[56:20] and and by extension council have in

[56:23] seeing that as private sector

[56:25] development proposals come forward um

[56:28] ensuring that those development

[56:29] proposals align with that master plan

[56:32] process to see that vision realized.

[56:34] Right? So we're we're um everything

[56:36] we're seeing and hearing so far tells us

[56:39] that the community will want to keep um

[56:42] those policies and keep that vision. If

[56:45] we hear differently through this

[56:46] process, we'll adjust. But um so far I

[56:48] think um that's a track we want to

[56:50] maintain.

[56:51] >> I would further add just as an oldtimer

[56:54] in the area. If you go past the car wash

[56:56] in Fort Sein, you'll notice the facade

[56:58] on the building. The facade on the

[57:00] building was created all those years ago

[57:02] because of the fact that we were

[57:04] anticipating this this village uh being

[57:09] constructed in

[57:13] >> patience is virtue. I suppose.

[57:15] >> Thank you,

[57:15] >> Councelor Bochek.

[57:18] >> Thank Thank you and through you, Mayor.

[57:20] Um, thanks for coming in, uh, Miss EMTT,

[57:22] this morning. Um, one of the questions

[57:24] that you asked that perhaps, um, the

[57:26] planners in the township didn't answer

[57:28] or couldn't answer is affordable

[57:30] housing. You asked about affordable

[57:33] housing. Affordable housing has been

[57:35] being uh, handled by the district of

[57:37] Msoka for the most part. and um not only

[57:41] affordable housing but um transitional

[57:44] housing and subsidized housing. But the

[57:46] most important part is for development

[57:49] where development belongs.

[57:51] They've located a couple of locations

[57:53] within the township that could be uh a

[57:57] place where affordable housing um would

[58:00] land, but I can assure you it would not

[58:03] have anything to do with the waterfront, properties, anything such as

[58:07] that. um the locations will be where

[58:11] affordable housing should be. So that's

[58:13] something that's ongoing at the district

[58:15] of Mskoka. I doubt it'll be solved this

[58:17] term, but it's been an ongoing

[58:20] discussion for quite some time at

[58:21] district.

[58:23] >> My greatest concern is the fact that we

[58:25] are losing people from our community,

[58:27] people that have are from families that

[58:31] have been here for generations and we're

[58:33] losing them because we can't we can't

[58:35] properly accommodate them. Sure, I

[58:37] understand that. And um our planning

[58:39] department can uh work with you. There

[58:42] has been a lot of changes where you can

[58:43] have second residence uh in your home.

[58:46] You can apply for a second residence.

[58:48] And not only that, but if your

[58:49] property's big enough, then you could be able to put a second

[58:54] residence on that property with a

[58:56] separate septic system as well. So, um I

[58:59] suggest you reach out to the planning

[59:00] department, get the details on that as

[59:02] well, too. that's in the planning

[59:04] stages. So, it it may help out with

[59:06] >> Just to be clear, I'm not looking at

[59:08] this for me. I'm I work at the food bank

[59:10] and there are a number of clients who

[59:11] come and they're being evicted from

[59:13] their from their homes and they can't

[59:16] stay here because there's no place for

[59:17] them to live.

[59:18] >> Sure. Absolutely.

[59:18] >> That's that's more my particular

[59:20] concern. Although, I do appreciate the

[59:22] fact that there is that second residence

[59:25] opportunity too, which I think is is

[59:27] helpful.

[59:28] >> Anyway, thank you for your time.

[59:30] >> Thank you, Councelor Grociano.

[59:33] Thank you and to you, Mayor. Um, Miss

[59:36] EMTT brings a valid point to the table

[59:39] given that we are effectively reviewing

[59:42] our social plan and uh undergoing a a

[59:47] review and exercise of this um and given

[59:49] the mandate and and the focus and

[59:53] attention that affordable housing has

[59:55] had not only proincially uh at the

[59:58] district level uh as well as uh within

[1:00:00] our council. Uh a question to our our

[1:00:03] planning team. Is there a way to codify

[1:00:06] future development requirements? Can we

[1:00:09] as a municipality uh when a developer

[1:00:11] comes to our uh council requesting

[1:00:15] development uh uh rights and and the

[1:00:18] ability to develop, can we ask them or

[1:00:21] mandate them to have a minimum of 10% of

[1:00:23] their development allocated to you know

[1:00:25] uh affordable housing based on uh you

[1:00:28] know maybe some of the larger urban area

[1:00:30] definitions such as um 10% lower than uh

[1:00:34] retail andor current market value. So,

[1:00:37] is there a way that we can kind of

[1:00:39] codify this uh into our uh our official

[1:00:42] plan and uh to ensure that uh future

[1:00:45] developers can and will develop

[1:00:47] affordable housing as they develop. The

[1:00:49] [snorts] other piece of this is um I

[1:00:51] want to thank everyone who's brought

[1:00:52] forward uh you know their their concerns

[1:00:54] with regards to the environmental

[1:00:56] impacts and and the ability for us to

[1:00:58] tighten things up on the environmental

[1:01:00] side. Uh for as many of you know, I'm very uh very concerned with the

[1:01:05] water quality within our municipality

[1:01:07] and want to maintain and preserve and uh

[1:01:09] if if can uh make our water better. Uh,

[1:01:12] and if there's ways that we can

[1:01:14] collectively here as council support

[1:01:16] that um that mandate, uh, I'd very much

[1:01:19] be interested in in hearing more about

[1:01:22] what our planning department and our

[1:01:23] planning team can do to ensure that uh,

[1:01:26] as we kind of review and amend and

[1:01:29] update uh, that we make things much more

[1:01:33] stronger in that uh, in that uh, respect

[1:01:35] as well. So overdoor planning with

[1:01:37] regards to the ability to mandate a

[1:01:40] developer in future developments to

[1:01:42] include a percentage of their

[1:01:43] development uh as low-income housing. Is

[1:01:46] it possible? Thank you.

[1:01:48] >> So my quick answer right now is is it

[1:01:50] possible today? No. Uh our current

[1:01:53] official plan

[1:01:55] has very sparse housing policies and it

[1:01:59] that is why it's one of the identified

[1:02:01] preliminary issues. uh the answer as to

[1:02:04] where we go. I think this is really too

[1:02:07] early to give, but certainly uh

[1:02:09] councelor Graciano's and other comments

[1:02:12] here today are going to be a part of the

[1:02:15] record. And again, we're hoping to have

[1:02:17] working groups focused on those topical

[1:02:20] areas and people who indicate interest

[1:02:23] in an area might be invited to join a

[1:02:26] working group. Um because yes, we we do

[1:02:30] very much want to improve our official

[1:02:32] plan in those topical areas that we've

[1:02:36] identified

[1:02:38] and that includes the environment.

[1:02:40] >> Thank you. Um Director Whit,

[1:02:42] >> thank you Mr. Mayor and and further to

[1:02:44] that that point and thank you councelor

[1:02:46] Gratziano. Um I I think what you might

[1:02:48] be touching on is the notion of what in

[1:02:51] planning terms is referred to as

[1:02:53] inclusionary zoning. That's something as

[1:02:55] Jeff mentioned we don't have in our

[1:02:56] official plan now and that's where

[1:02:58] municipalities uh can prescribe you know

[1:03:00] a certain percentage 5% for example

[1:03:02] affordable housing in a development um

[1:03:05] we could you know you you can really

[1:03:07] drill down into this um and and much um is talked about in terms of what what

[1:03:13] how is affordable housing defined right

[1:03:15] what price point what what um um format

[1:03:19] of housing or or ownership etc so those

[1:03:22] are all things we're happy to

[1:03:23] investigate through this process It's

[1:03:25] not the first time we've heard that

[1:03:26] comment already. Um and it's certainly

[1:03:29] important as we've heard um you know to

[1:03:33] provide housing options for people um

[1:03:35] starting out in this community. Um also

[1:03:38] for people who have been in this

[1:03:39] community a long time and want to remain

[1:03:42] in the community and age in place as

[1:03:44] they say. So appreciate the comment and

[1:03:46] it's something we're definitely going to

[1:03:47] look into.

[1:03:48] >> We have some work to do but thank you

[1:03:49] very much.

[1:03:52] back to our audience.

[1:03:54] Please come forward.

[1:04:04] Good morning. Uh Don Connor, 109

[1:04:06] Hillside Drive. I was wondering if

[1:04:08] there's anything in the development uh

[1:04:10] program to deal with the vacant lots

[1:04:12] that are on Hillside Drive, which I

[1:04:14] think was supposed to be called phase

[1:04:15] two or something.

[1:04:22] Thank you. Um through the mayor. Um so

[1:04:25] the the current policy framework um

[1:04:28] probably for that area won't change.

[1:04:29] It's designated residential. All the

[1:04:31] policies are there to allow for that

[1:04:33] development um to fully realize itself.

[1:04:36] Um if [clears throat] if you're if I may

[1:04:38] ask if are you one of the land owners on

[1:04:40] Hillside Drive? Um okay. So the township

[1:04:42] has reached out to the owners of all

[1:04:44] those properties in phase 2 and with um

[1:04:47] a proposal um providing options um for

[1:04:51] land owners to either participate in a

[1:04:53] process to see the completion of phase 2

[1:04:56] and the intent would be to see phase 2

[1:04:58] completed just as phase one is um open

[1:05:01] ditches um individual well septic etc.

[1:05:05] Um and the township is also in in that

[1:05:08] outreach afforded um uh the opportunity

[1:05:10] for people who may be interested in

[1:05:12] selling their lots um to the township.

[1:05:15] Um we would also consider that as well.

[1:05:16] So it's very current. It's very active

[1:05:19] right now. We're looking to essentially

[1:05:21] step in um as the municipality and work

[1:05:24] with the land owners um of those lots to

[1:05:28] see phase 2 completed and and to the

[1:05:30] same standard that phase one is.

[1:05:33] >> Okay. And just a follow-up question, if

[1:05:36] the municipality buys them, what would

[1:05:38] be their intention to do with it?

[1:05:42] >> So, it would certain just allow the

[1:05:43] municipality to um control those lots

[1:05:46] and see them ultimately develop. We

[1:05:48] don't we don't wish to become a

[1:05:49] developer. We don't wish to put

[1:05:51] municipal facilities on them. The the

[1:05:53] intent would be for those um just to

[1:05:56] provide an option for those land owners

[1:05:57] who want out and and don't want to

[1:06:00] participate um financially in seeing

[1:06:03] phase 2 completed, then the then the

[1:06:06] township would consider um stepping in

[1:06:08] and ultimately seeing those lots um back

[1:06:10] on the market. But in the interim, the

[1:06:12] township may acquire them. Um this is

[1:06:15] all subject to budgets, etc. Um but the

[1:06:18] formal reach out in writing has been

[1:06:20] made to all the land owners. Okay. Thank

[1:06:23] you.

[1:06:24] >> Thank you.

[1:06:29] » Sure. Please come on forward.

[1:06:39] » Uh good morning mayor and council and

[1:06:41] residents of uh Georgian Bay Township.

[1:06:44] My name is Monica Bovette. I'm a public

[1:06:46] health nurse with the Senoma Muscoa

[1:06:48] District Health Unit. I live at 62 here

[1:06:50] on woods in Oro Madante, but I've been

[1:06:53] working in the township of Georgian Bay

[1:06:55] with u members of staff with uh

[1:06:58] community groups uh for the past three

[1:07:01] years. So in my role, I work with um mo

[1:07:07] yearround residents and those uh people

[1:07:11] uh living in poverty or living in the

[1:07:15] lower income brackets in the region. And

[1:07:18] the way that the health unit involves

[1:07:21] itself with municipalities across Mskoka

[1:07:24] is that we ask for the opportunity to

[1:07:27] apply our to our assessment tools with

[1:07:30] the um proposals, the changes in the uh

[1:07:34] official plan and also the existing

[1:07:36] official plan for look for opportunities

[1:07:38] to comment on where healthy public

[1:07:41] policy intersects with planning policy

[1:07:44] and also the human health impacts of um

[1:07:48] decisions related to economic

[1:07:51] development um environmental pressures

[1:07:54] and um the livability of the spaces. So

[1:07:59] I specifically in my role with community

[1:08:02] groups focus on the increasing

[1:08:06] um inability of residents to be able to

[1:08:09] own a personal vehicle or have access to

[1:08:11] a personal vehicle. So looking for

[1:08:13] opportunities to make the community um

[1:08:17] accessible for those and for younger um

[1:08:20] teens again as um Miss EMTT mentioned

[1:08:23] about um having people stay in the

[1:08:26] community. So having opportunities for

[1:08:29] within those families when youth become

[1:08:32] at an eligible age that they can work um

[1:08:35] that they have local work available and

[1:08:38] they can get to that job safely uh

[1:08:41] without maybe access to a vehicle. The

[1:08:44] second area I focus on is food access.

[1:08:46] also in relation to planning looking at

[1:08:49] where and this will probably come in the

[1:08:52] site plans and it's it's I have read

[1:08:55] bill 98 it's still unclear when we look

[1:08:58] at food systems and agricultural um

[1:09:02] commenting where people would be able to

[1:09:05] grow food where they're able to sell

[1:09:08] food and where they're able to buy food

[1:09:10] and then also looking in relation to

[1:09:13] housing um the idea that was brought forth by the planner earlier

[1:09:19] looking for mixed use residential, how

[1:09:22] to overlap maybe commercial enterprise

[1:09:25] with um residential units. So mix zoning

[1:09:29] um and in the translation of the bylaws

[1:09:32] looking at those opportunities

[1:09:35] um for some creative ways to help feed

[1:09:39] and house people that um in all honesty

[1:09:44] a lot of the time are invisible because

[1:09:46] of the focus on um all of the wonderful

[1:09:51] things that Georgian Bay has to offer uh

[1:09:54] the affluent uh portions of our

[1:09:56] communities. So I just wanted to raise

[1:09:58] that um we do and my question would be

[1:10:02] when or where would there be

[1:10:05] opportunities for myself and uh other

[1:10:09] members of the health unit because I do

[1:10:11] have support both from our environmental

[1:10:13] health division and um from our um our

[1:10:18] other our um healthy growth and

[1:10:20] development uh specialists as well. So,

[1:10:23] I'm just wondering where there might be

[1:10:25] an opportunity for comment and then also

[1:10:28] receiving a report from the health unit

[1:10:31] when we've had an opportunity to do kind

[1:10:33] of a line by line review of um any

[1:10:36] documents that the township's producing.

[1:10:41] >> So, again, I I very much appreciate

[1:10:43] that. Um and hopefully you will be

[1:10:46] interested in participating as much as

[1:10:49] we can make you um uh rely upon you. We

[1:10:54] are very interested in this part. This

[1:10:56] is one of the topics that we've

[1:10:58] identified and and I would say that my

[1:11:01] name is Jeff Katr. My email address is

[1:11:03] in the notice.

[1:11:04] >> Okay. But there's also a business card

[1:11:06] at the front on the on your way out and

[1:11:08] please just send me a quick email of

[1:11:11] offering to participate in a working

[1:11:13] group and uh we're putting together

[1:11:15] lists.

[1:11:16] >> Okay. And yeah, as I said, it's um I

[1:11:20] have those two focus areas. It's a

[1:11:22] little bit um difficult for me sometimes

[1:11:25] to do some of the translation of where I

[1:11:28] would best fit. So, that's kind of why

[1:11:29] I've described my scope of practice and

[1:11:32] then hoping that you can help me

[1:11:34] navigate some of that uh planning

[1:11:36] language and um we could talk about

[1:11:39] where I might might best be able to give

[1:11:42] that feedback.

[1:11:43] >> Well, again, we haven't yet identified

[1:11:45] health as an issue.

[1:11:46] >> Okay.

[1:11:47] >> But maybe it is.

[1:11:49] >> Uh yes, it I would like [laughter] to

[1:11:50] say it definitely is. um because we're

[1:11:54] you know again I understand and I think

[1:11:56] it's very important the um the emphasis

[1:12:00] on environmental health but it's really

[1:12:03] you know environmental health is linked

[1:12:05] to human health and uh humans are

[1:12:09] causing the the environmental problems

[1:12:11] so I think also looking at you know

[1:12:14] developing in a environmentally

[1:12:17] responsible way but also a way that um

[1:12:20] has both physical and mental al health

[1:12:23] um benefits rather than is uh is

[1:12:26] detrimental to the humans that make up

[1:12:29] our places.

[1:12:31] >> Well, and again very quickly, I think my

[1:12:33] answer to you would be there's a couple

[1:12:34] of topics already that exist. One

[1:12:36] obviously housing. um the other uh

[1:12:40] perhaps uh both the Port Sever and and

[1:12:42] McTar uh urban areas, but it won't be up

[1:12:46] to planning staff to decide to adjust

[1:12:48] the topics, but it will be my

[1:12:51] responsibility to bring a report to

[1:12:53] council sometime soon uh with what we

[1:12:57] heard today and suggestions. And again,

[1:13:00] I very much appreciate your input and

[1:13:02] very much hope you do send me an email

[1:13:04] so that I can enlist you in

[1:13:07] opportunities to participate.

[1:13:10] >> No problem. Thank you very much for the

[1:13:11] opportunity. Thank you, Mary.

[1:13:13] >> If I can take this opportunity to ask

[1:13:14] that you and anybody else who hasn't did

[1:13:17] not sign the list, please do so.

[1:13:18] >> Sure.

[1:13:20] >> That way, uh, our clerk will be feeling

[1:13:22] a little better that she's got

[1:13:23] everything under control.

[1:13:25] >> Okay. [sighs] Thank you so much.

[1:13:27] >> Thank you very much. Um,

[1:13:30] councelor Bochek,

[1:13:32] thank you and through your mayor. Um,

[1:13:34] and thank you Monica for the

[1:13:35] presentation. Very informative. Um, I

[1:13:39] would like you to send me as well uh the

[1:13:41] first part um of your presentation to do

[1:13:44] with uh health health care that you do

[1:13:47] between uh Moonstone or Simco County and

[1:13:51] Township of Georgian Bay. just give me a

[1:13:53] better idea of of what you do and what

[1:13:56] the issues are that you find. Um I

[1:13:59] happen to sit on the on the health

[1:14:01] committee um health services committee

[1:14:04] at the district of mscoa which is where

[1:14:06] we talk about these things

[1:14:08] and then if there's something of merit

[1:14:10] or something we can do we bring it up at

[1:14:13] the second tier level um and present it

[1:14:15] to council. So um we do have a member of

[1:14:19] our council that sits on the simple

[1:14:21] mscoa health unit

[1:14:24] um Sandy Karens which I will speak to her

[1:14:29] as well too. But uh once you give me

[1:14:32] that information just a short uh a note

[1:14:35] I will take it to the health services

[1:14:36] committee see if I can escalate it up to

[1:14:39] the council kind of at the end of this

[1:14:41] term of council. There's only a couple

[1:14:43] months left. So, um,

[1:14:46] working on this and getting it to the

[1:14:48] stage where it goes in front of council

[1:14:50] maybe in the next term, but we'll start

[1:14:52] the ball rolling and then district can

[1:14:55] come back to our planning department and

[1:14:57] inform them if there's any needs they

[1:14:59] need from the township to to carry

[1:15:01] forward. So, I think we have a pretty

[1:15:03] good uh look at it.

[1:15:06] >> Sure. Maybe I can just comment that I've

[1:15:08] already um submitted comments to the uh

[1:15:12] through the health unit um for the

[1:15:15] district's official plan and the

[1:15:17] district's uh transportation master

[1:15:19] plan.

[1:15:19] >> Excellent. Thank you.

[1:15:23] >> Thank you. Um

[1:15:25] anyone else,

[1:15:29] » Mr. Kasakus?

[1:15:36] Good morning, council. My name is Artha

[1:15:38] Kstacos. I'm a property owner on

[1:15:39] Hillside Drive. Um, Hillside phase 2 is

[1:15:44] of interest to me, but uh my property um

[1:15:48] my eastern border abuts the Port Severn

[1:15:50] Heights development.

[1:15:54] um

[1:15:55] that was supposed to include a mix of

[1:15:58] housing which I think would have

[1:15:59] included some definition of affordable

[1:16:02] housing.

[1:16:04] It's 15 years old or or more. Uh my

[1:16:10] question

[1:16:10] >> sorry

[1:16:11] >> 20 years old. Um,

[1:16:14] >> yep. When I ask people, particularly in

[1:16:18] the township, uh, official capacities,

[1:16:22] why is there no development there in 20

[1:16:23] years? They smile and laugh.

[1:16:28] And I'm wondering how come we have an

[1:16:31] approved

[1:16:33] um

[1:16:34] area for I think it was 375

[1:16:38] multi-

[1:16:40] uh dwelling complex of some kind. But

[1:16:43] all

[1:16:43] >> your honor, I'm going to have to declare

[1:16:45] a conflict of interest.

[1:16:46] >> Thank you.

[1:16:48] >> So my my question is

[1:16:51] why do we have one huge property that's

[1:16:54] been approved for so long? And I give

[1:16:56] one context. At one point the property

[1:16:59] was clearcut and I approached uh well

[1:17:02] councelor Bochek at the time and I asked

[1:17:04] him well what's going on there and he

[1:17:07] didn't know and he approached council

[1:17:09] and everyone had forgotten that they had

[1:17:11] received approval to do that six years

[1:17:13] prior and they were doing something that

[1:17:16] they were approved to do but it had been

[1:17:18] so long nobody could remember that they

[1:17:20] actually had permission to do so.

[1:17:22] >> Um the I I can give you a partial

[1:17:24] answer. One is it's privately owned and

[1:17:27] there's only so much we can do with a

[1:17:29] developer who owns a property and

[1:17:30] doesn't do anything with it. And two,

[1:17:32] it's actually in front of district

[1:17:33] council staff right now.

[1:17:36] >> Okay. So, that would be it is how how

[1:17:39] can something that's so in it's it's

[1:17:41] close. It's right next to where it needs

[1:17:43] to be. It has a commercial front end. I

[1:17:45] believe it started with a a golf course

[1:17:48] at the top which would have shared a

[1:17:50] border with my property. Um,

[1:17:53] how can we get that project through this

[1:17:56] process uh to the next phase? How do we

[1:17:58] get it going?

[1:17:59] >> One one of the things that we've learned

[1:18:00] the hard way, we mean municipalities

[1:18:02] writ large, not just ours, is that when

[1:18:05] we give planning approvals now, we put

[1:18:07] deadlines on them. They never used to do

[1:18:10] that. And uh in this particular project,

[1:18:13] uh the the approvals are being I I

[1:18:16] believe will end up being updated with a

[1:18:18] deadline.

[1:18:19] >> Great. Thank you very much.

[1:18:27] Anyone else?

[1:18:34] » Oh, sorry. One minute.

[1:18:37] >> Okay.

[1:18:49] Go ahead, please.

[1:18:51] >> Okay. Um, good morning to the mayor, the

[1:18:53] clerk, counselors, planning staff, and

[1:18:55] the audience. Um, I'd firstly like to

[1:18:58] thank you guys for inviting Woxing First

[1:19:00] Nation um, to engage on this official

[1:19:03] plan. Um, all in all, we'd like to

[1:19:05] understand how indigenous communities,

[1:19:07] including with socks and first nation,

[1:19:09] will be directly involved in developing

[1:19:10] the indigenous engagement chapter and

[1:19:13] other policies that will affect our

[1:19:14] rights, lands, waters, and um, interests

[1:19:16] throughout the review. Um, I have a few

[1:19:18] questions. I have a lot of questions,

[1:19:20] but um, I'll talk to Mr. Kraki after the

[1:19:23] meeting about my other questions, so I'm

[1:19:24] not here all day. Um but my first

[1:19:28] question that I'm proposing on behalf of

[1:19:30] Woxing would be um which indigenous

[1:19:32] communities has the township identified

[1:19:34] for the direct engagement of the

[1:19:36] official planner view and how were those

[1:19:37] determinations made?

[1:19:41] » So thank you for that question. Um, the

[1:19:45] District of Muskoka has what's referred

[1:19:48] to as Malt, which is a a relationship

[1:19:52] that's been developed over I'm going to

[1:19:54] say a decade or so with a number of

[1:19:57] >> seven years.

[1:19:59] >> Okay.

[1:19:59] >> Seven and a half years,

[1:20:00] >> almost a decade. Um, with a number of uh

[1:20:04] First Nations um as well as the Mi

[1:20:08] Nation of Ontario. Um,

[1:20:11] your First Nation has indicated

[1:20:16] previously interest and I uncertain why

[1:20:20] you have not yet, I believe, been

[1:20:22] invited to that table. Um, but certainly

[1:20:25] the Township of Georgian Bay responds to

[1:20:30] all indigenous communities that may be

[1:20:33] interested in our official plan and

[1:20:34] we're not going to limit limit it by any

[1:20:37] stretch of the imagination.

[1:20:39] So far we've done direct outreach um to

[1:20:42] the Boseley First Nation uh to the um

[1:20:46] Kiran Wend

[1:20:48] to the Matei Nation to Mustier Point to

[1:20:53] Rama to Shanaga to Wata and to yourself.

[1:20:59] But again that was um based upon the

[1:21:02] interest that we had previously received

[1:21:04] from you in matters in Georgian Bay

[1:21:07] Township. Um, and again, if there's a a

[1:21:10] first if there's a First Nation or an

[1:21:13] indigenous community that's been left

[1:21:15] off of our list, if they're watching,

[1:21:17] listening, um, we would be very happy to

[1:21:20] include them as well.

[1:21:22] >> Yeah, I was going to follow up. If um,

[1:21:24] we did have nations to suggest, is that

[1:21:26] something that we could suggest and you

[1:21:27] guys could follow up with?

[1:21:29] >> Yes.

[1:21:29] >> Perfect. Um, apologies. I also forgot to

[1:21:32] introduce myself as much as I practice

[1:21:35] what to say before I came up here. But

[1:21:37] um my name is Lily Edmonds and I'm the

[1:21:40] community consultation coordinator with

[1:21:41] Woxing First Nation. Um I will propose

[1:21:45] another question. Um, I wanted to know

[1:21:48] if the township was considering

[1:21:50] identifying and recognizing within the

[1:21:52] official plan the indigenous communities

[1:21:55] um of which traditional territories,

[1:21:57] treaty rights, and ongoing relations

[1:21:59] extend to the lands and waters covered

[1:22:01] by the plan.

[1:22:03] >> So again, if you can help me with that,

[1:22:07] much appreciated. Again, we want to be

[1:22:09] as inclusive as we can be. Um the list

[1:22:12] so far is by no way the end necessarily.

[1:22:16] It's the starting point.

[1:22:18] >> Perfect. I apologize if some of my

[1:22:20] questions are more preliminary. Um I'll

[1:22:24] propose um one last question. Um because

[1:22:28] the notice says that the submissions

[1:22:30] become part of the public record. um

[1:22:32] what processes will protect confidential

[1:22:34] indigenous knowledge, culturally sensitive information and um

[1:22:39] information concerning significant sites

[1:22:41] that indigenous communities may provide.

[1:22:45] >> That too is an excellent question and I

[1:22:47] do not have a quick answer for you. Um

[1:22:49] and I would greatly appreciate um some

[1:22:53] time to consider it and get back to you

[1:22:56] by email.

[1:22:57] >> Of course. Apologies again if the

[1:22:59] questions are very preliminary. No, your

[1:23:01] questions are excellent and I very much

[1:23:03] appreciate them. I think there's one

[1:23:04] answer that I didn't give you and that

[1:23:06] is again

[1:23:08] we are going to rely upon indigenous

[1:23:11] communities as much as they are willing

[1:23:14] to participate to help us to learn not

[1:23:19] only about each community but also to

[1:23:23] learn much more about how we can engage

[1:23:26] you because I think the difference

[1:23:28] between what we're being asked to do in

[1:23:31] this new official plan versus what we've

[1:23:33] done in the past is that in the past

[1:23:36] you've received public notice after public notice

[1:23:41] frequently with very very short time

[1:23:44] frames for a response and you receive

[1:23:47] those not just from our municipality I'm

[1:23:49] sure you receive them from many

[1:23:51] >> definitely a

[1:23:52] >> and so what we're I think being asked to

[1:23:54] do by our council and by the province is

[1:23:58] to find a better way to engage the

[1:24:02] indigenous communities

[1:24:03] And do I know what that better way is?

[1:24:07] Absolutely not. No idea. Looking forward

[1:24:10] to talking about it with as many people

[1:24:12] as we can discuss it. Um and again, it's

[1:24:15] going to be crucial that that it works

[1:24:19] for each indigenous community. So, does

[1:24:21] it have to be one way? No, I don't think

[1:24:25] so. So if one indigenous community needs

[1:24:30] engagement through one method and

[1:24:32] another needs it through another method,

[1:24:35] I don't see that as an issue.

[1:24:38] >> Perfect. I appreciate your honesty and

[1:24:40] transparency. Um and so appreciates

[1:24:43] being engaged in this meeting and having

[1:24:45] the opportunity to contribute to this

[1:24:47] review. And um I'll last you with more

[1:24:49] questions after this meeting.

[1:24:51] >> Great.

[1:24:52] >> Thank you everyone.

[1:24:53] >> Thank you very much. Appreciate you

[1:24:54] coming. Anyone

[1:25:00] else?

[1:25:08] And nobody online has raised their hand.

[1:25:10] And I'm going to yet again to all those

[1:25:13] viewing online that signed up, if you

[1:25:16] want to say anything, please raise your

[1:25:17] hand or do something to indicate to us

[1:25:19] that uh you want to be moved over. Um,

[1:25:27] all right.

[1:25:31] Should I do that going once, going twice

[1:25:33] thing? But the good news is if you don't

[1:25:36] speak now, you're more than welcome to

[1:25:38] speak later. And councelor Boche, did

[1:25:41] you want to add something?

[1:25:42] >> Yes. Um, thank you. and through your worship. Um, a couple of questions

[1:25:47] to our planning department just for

[1:25:49] clarity on topics that have been brought

[1:25:51] up here today and some that you uh

[1:25:54] referred to in the beginning of your

[1:25:55] report. Port Southern Town Center, um,

[1:26:00] that's kind of a hard one because Port

[1:26:02] Sver, my Port Severign is Tay Township,

[1:26:06] Sever Township, and Georgia Bay

[1:26:08] Township. That's my Port Sever. Um, and

[1:26:12] I'm wondering if we're going to be

[1:26:13] reaching out to those other two

[1:26:14] townships to see if there's some sort of

[1:26:18] relationship we can spawn on on

[1:26:20] bettering uh the village of Port Severn

[1:26:24] inclusively with those other townships.

[1:26:26] So, that's something I'd like you to

[1:26:28] follow if you could. We talked earlier

[1:26:30] about the u the water levels and the

[1:26:34] flooding and how that pertains to the

[1:26:36] planning department. Um that's a hard

[1:26:39] one. Um between the MSCOA wershed, the

[1:26:44] integrated watershed and SSEA, they look

[1:26:48] at those trends. And I don't know a lot

[1:26:50] of people know that Georgian Bay has a

[1:26:52] 17 foot swing. In other words, it can

[1:26:55] rise and fall that far depending on

[1:26:58] winds and that type of thing. So that

[1:27:00] needs to be uh looked at very very

[1:27:02] closely. And my last point, um,

[1:27:08] our premier, Mr. Ford, said, "Build more

[1:27:13] homes faster."

[1:27:15] My question to you is where it's

[1:27:18] applicable.

[1:27:20] Why aren't we or why can't we reduce the

[1:27:23] amount of restrictions and bylaws put

[1:27:26] into place? I mean, we're looking at

[1:27:28] adding bylaws here and making bylaws to

[1:27:30] better our township.

[1:27:32] um can we can we look at reducing some

[1:27:36] of the restrictions in the planning

[1:27:38] department so um housing can be built in

[1:27:42] land in in the proper locations um I

[1:27:46] think it's very important and I think

[1:27:47] our rules are far too strong um and we

[1:27:50] need to soften them or reook at them and find out better ways that we can

[1:27:55] help people develop inland and that's

[1:27:58] just my comments and I have the

[1:28:00] fortunate

[1:28:02] ability to walk into your office and

[1:28:04] talk to you about it. So, we will take

[1:28:06] this up um together. I don't think we

[1:28:08] need to delve too far into it unless you

[1:28:11] have something you want to add.

[1:28:13] >> No, I was just going to say that my

[1:28:14] answer would be yes, yes, and yes. All

[1:28:16] of those are important matters. Um and

[1:28:20] they are definitely within the topics

[1:28:22] that we've identified so far for this

[1:28:24] review and update. Where we will end up,

[1:28:28] I cannot begin to imagine yet.

[1:28:31] Thank you. Um, does any other counselor

[1:28:35] wish to add any remarks at this point?

[1:28:38] I mean, this will be an ongoing process

[1:28:40] that we all understand, but uh,

[1:28:43] member or councelor Jarvis.

[1:28:45] >> Yes, you may. Um,

[1:28:51] yeah, I just want to bring something to

[1:28:54] Plan's attention. I think it's probably

[1:28:56] already on the list of things, but um in

[1:28:58] my mind, words matter and words are

[1:29:02] extremely important when it comes to

[1:29:03] planning. Um words such as shall and

[1:29:06] shall not have specific um meanings

[1:29:10] within the planning documents. And at

[1:29:14] times um uh over my time on council I

[1:29:18] found significant conflict between words

[1:29:21] that are in the planning document and then how they are

[1:29:24] interpreted in um planning applications

[1:29:28] and approvals which can be a little

[1:29:31] distracting at times. Um, I I realize

[1:29:34] that bill 98 is going to complicate

[1:29:36] things with regards to how we word our

[1:29:39] documentation,

[1:29:41] but within our planning section A2.2.6

[1:29:45] is a very uh concerning statement um

[1:29:49] that I would really like us to try and

[1:29:52] um address within the

[1:29:57] review as it comes forward. Um and that

[1:30:01] do that specific the paragraph within

[1:30:03] 2.2.6

[1:30:06] fundamentally and and Bill you may be

[1:30:08] aware of this you may not it it tends to

[1:30:11] remove the uh necessity to address the

[1:30:16] words within the planning document

[1:30:17] itself. So shall and shall not all of a

[1:30:19] sudden become moot when you read that

[1:30:22] paragraph or in my mind it does. And I

[1:30:24] think we need to address that and any

[1:30:26] other sections that um reduce

[1:30:30] uh the intent of uh of what we've got

[1:30:35] going on in planning.

[1:30:38] So, I think I'm going to say that the

[1:30:40] terms of reference that council has

[1:30:42] given us for this official plan review,

[1:30:46] which will also be carried forward into

[1:30:48] the zoning bylaw review because it was

[1:30:50] originally intended, of course, to

[1:30:52] happen as one, but we can't do that now

[1:30:54] because we're doing a new official plan.

[1:30:56] But the intention was to always ensure

[1:31:00] uh the integration of those documents.

[1:31:02] And I think I I I I understand the

[1:31:06] problem you've highlighted to really be

[1:31:08] more about the lack of integration

[1:31:11] oftent times between our official plan

[1:31:14] and our zoning bylaw. We have some

[1:31:17] really interesting anomalies. Um we've

[1:31:20] talked about Port Southern Village

[1:31:22] Center a lot today. We have a village

[1:31:25] center plan that identifies it very

[1:31:27] clearly as to what it's supposed to be.

[1:31:30] Yet then we have designations within the

[1:31:32] schedule of our official plan dealing

[1:31:34] with the port 7 urban area which do not

[1:31:37] follow through with that plan. And then

[1:31:40] worse yet, we have zones

[1:31:43] on land which again do not implement

[1:31:47] what was planned by this council and

[1:31:51] previous councils. And I think that one

[1:31:53] of the key things we will be doing that

[1:31:55] isn't a topic because it's an

[1:31:57] overarching term of reference is making

[1:32:00] sure at the end of the day that yes,

[1:32:01] language does matter.

[1:32:04] But I would also say as a planner my

[1:32:07] bias is that we not try and have few

[1:32:11] zoning bylaws. I think the official plan

[1:32:14] needs to lead the zoning bylaw with

[1:32:17] policies

[1:32:19] and those policies then implement

[1:32:22] through the zoning bylaw, which is where

[1:32:25] you would typically use shall [snorts]

[1:32:28] or shall not. And so I think what is

[1:32:33] really good about this new framework is

[1:32:36] it's going to force us and every

[1:32:38] municipality to be very careful in how

[1:32:42] we structure our official plan. And part

[1:32:44] of this notion of streamlining the

[1:32:46] process that comes from the federal

[1:32:48] government and provincial government

[1:32:50] through Bill 98 is that if a developer

[1:32:53] is going to any municipality in this

[1:32:55] country,

[1:32:56] they will essentially be able to very

[1:32:58] quickly appreciate what that

[1:33:00] municipality wants because they don't

[1:33:02] have to figure out where it is. There's

[1:33:05] going to be one location for it. Um, so

[1:33:08] again, my hope is that we can address

[1:33:11] your concern not entirely through the

[1:33:14] official plan, but ultimately at the end

[1:33:17] of the day when we have an official plan

[1:33:20] and a zoning bylaw through the second

[1:33:23] part of this review um that work

[1:33:26] together to do what the policies plan to

[1:33:31] do.

[1:33:36] Um, for the benefit of our audience and

[1:33:38] your mayor, 2.2.6, was that the

[1:33:41] paragraph you were concerned about?

[1:33:44] >> Very specifically, yes.

[1:33:46] >> And And what was that? And what is that

[1:33:47] the topic of 2.2.6?

[1:33:49] >> Let me pull it up for you if I can find

[1:33:52] it. I have it.

[1:33:54] >> Do I still have it?

[1:33:56] >> Through the through the mayor while

[1:33:57] we're waiting. the policy um that that

[1:34:00] councelor Jarvis is referring to is

[1:34:02] really that one that that speaks to

[1:34:04] allowing flexibility, you know, in terms

[1:34:06] of numbers and policy and and that

[1:34:09] numbers aren't necessarily absolute and

[1:34:11] um and u you know to Mr. Kraky's point

[1:34:15] um policy is intended to be just that.

[1:34:18] So there's typically a built-in element

[1:34:21] of flex flexibility

[1:34:23] um but there can be absolutes in policy.

[1:34:26] Um the provincial policy statement which

[1:34:29] is the overarching guiding document for

[1:34:32] planning in Ontario has a few elements

[1:34:34] in it that are absolute shall must and

[1:34:38] that's just the way it is. So I think we

[1:34:40] need to be judicious when we do this but

[1:34:43] if there's a desire from council and

[1:34:45] from the community to see certain things

[1:34:48] that are absolute that are very

[1:34:50] important um for the long-term

[1:34:51] development of this community we can

[1:34:53] certainly look at that.

[1:34:55] >> Thank you. And mayor, you can see it's

[1:34:57] on the screen now.

[1:34:57] >> Yeah, I see that. Thank you. Appreciate

[1:34:59] that. Um, councelor Cooper.

[1:35:06] » Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'm just really

[1:35:09] inquiring. Have you opened up this the

[1:35:12] section of this meeting where the

[1:35:13] counselors speak because I've heard from

[1:35:15] councelor Bochek and counselor Jarvis.

[1:35:18] Um, do you want us to launch right into

[1:35:21] our um

[1:35:22] >> That's why I've rec that's why I've

[1:35:24] recognized you.

[1:35:26] >> Okay. So, we've moved on to that section

[1:35:28] of the meeting. I didn't realize that it

[1:35:29] was sort of a very smooth transition.

[1:35:32] >> Yes, we were very smooth.

[1:35:36] >> Congratulations on that front. Um, if I

[1:35:39] could just uh I do have a few points and

[1:35:42] uh one of it one of them actually aligns

[1:35:44] with council Jarvis in terms of

[1:35:47] uh the use of verbiage uh in our op um

[1:35:52] but the started wanted to start with

[1:35:54] sort of at 10,000 ft um and remind us

[1:35:58] and and think about having things

[1:36:01] included in the official plan that

[1:36:04] reflect some of the other things that

[1:36:06] we've talked about at at the township

[1:36:08] and believe in things like our strategic

[1:36:10] plan.

[1:36:12] Priority number one, the environment.

[1:36:15] Those words should be the strategic plan

[1:36:18] and the environment being number one

[1:36:20] should be in the official plan. It's a direction and uh I would ask that

[1:36:26] some consideration by our planners be

[1:36:28] given to that. If it's already in there,

[1:36:30] great. Let's make sure it's still in

[1:36:32] there in the future. Um uh there are a

[1:36:34] few others that are like that. Our

[1:36:37] township has an area that's most of a

[1:36:39] good part of it is in the UNESCO

[1:36:43] designated Georgia Bay biosphere. That's

[1:36:46] a very important thing that it was

[1:36:48] established and it it sets the tone for

[1:36:52] what we do here. So I ask that uh there

[1:36:55] be mention of some of these things that

[1:36:58] are in our township. The other thing I

[1:37:00] think is equally important is the the

[1:37:03] species corridor that the GBLT pulled

[1:37:06] together with the township's cooperation

[1:37:09] and was able to take all the road

[1:37:12] allowances over and create a huge area

[1:37:15] for species corridors and wetland

[1:37:17] protection. That's another thing that

[1:37:20] it's a descriptor of who and what we

[1:37:22] are. There's others other things. So I'm

[1:37:25] going to just continue to read through

[1:37:27] my somewhat long list. is not too long.

[1:37:30] But uh uh I think the other thing we

[1:37:33] need to acknowledge is that the the

[1:37:35] character of our area enables residents

[1:37:39] to join enjoy a semi-w wilderness

[1:37:42] experience. And I'm stressing that term

[1:37:44] semi-w wilderness experience. And

[1:37:47] frankly, when you look at some of the

[1:37:50] other cottage areas,

[1:37:52] it's not exactly the same thing. They're

[1:37:55] not really semi-w wilderness. are more

[1:37:57] urban in nature. Cheek by jao, one

[1:38:01] property after another after another.

[1:38:02] Nothing wrong with that, but it's more

[1:38:04] urban in nature. And I think we need to

[1:38:06] remember that the township of Georgian

[1:38:08] Bay uh in in terms of uh one of the few

[1:38:12] municipalities in central and southern

[1:38:14] Ontario that has that very clear semi-w

[1:38:19] wilderness experience. And I think that

[1:38:21] should be included in our official plan

[1:38:24] as a descriptor. Um there's a few other

[1:38:28] things here, mayor, if I could just uh

[1:38:30] cover off a few other little issues. Um

[1:38:35] >> uh I I realize that uh we have um you

[1:38:40] know exceptions in our rulings and ru

[1:38:43] and rules around lot size. Um but a lot

[1:38:49] of the numericics are mischaracterized

[1:38:52] as guidelines when in fact they uh

[1:38:56] should be really numeric that are

[1:38:58] thresholds. The more thresholds that we

[1:39:01] can include

[1:39:02] uh will help us not

[1:39:06] ruin our semi-w wilderness experience.

[1:39:08] And so that's another thing that we need

[1:39:11] to continue continue to sort of pay

[1:39:13] attention to is more thresholds and not

[1:39:17] flexible guidelines. The word and

[1:39:20] flexible policies which was mentioned

[1:39:22] recently I think it's uh important for

[1:39:25] us to remember we have thresholds we

[1:39:28] need to establish more thresholds and uh

[1:39:31] think about that. Um, we also uh

[1:39:37] we don't really want to see

[1:39:39] overdevelopment of our waterfront areas

[1:39:41] and and it's not an anexrable right.

[1:39:45] It's a choice and we have a we can make

[1:39:49] that choice. This is what we want to do

[1:39:51] and so uh most of our citizens at least

[1:39:55] are feel very strongly about that.

[1:39:57] doesn't mean that the urban areas would

[1:39:59] apply apply in that uh sort of under

[1:40:02] those considerations but but the rural

[1:40:06] areas do and should. So choice versus

[1:40:09] inexurable rights. The final thing I

[1:40:12] wanted to uh talk about and I guess this

[1:40:14] would be more in the bylaws as opposed

[1:40:18] to the official plan. Although some

[1:40:21] lawyers, planning lawyers say that if

[1:40:23] you put it in the official plan and in

[1:40:26] your bylaws, it's a belt and suspenders.

[1:40:29] And that's not a bad thing because it

[1:40:31] sort of forces um things to be very

[1:40:34] clear. So here's one of the guidelines

[1:40:35] that I'd like to see with respect to

[1:40:37] minor variances and that is that we hear

[1:40:40] that you can't put percentages on

[1:40:42] things. I suggest that we could. I

[1:40:45] suggest that we could have specific

[1:40:48] numeric for example

[1:40:50] um and I'm happy to send this list to

[1:40:53] you but uh from 0 to 500 feet maybe you

[1:40:56] can have up to 25% increase because

[1:40:58] smaller structures could have a bigger

[1:41:01] percentage. I I get that but let's say

[1:41:04] at 500 to 1500 square ft you you get no

[1:41:07] more than a 15% increase over 1500% or

[1:41:12] 1500 square feet you get up to 10%

[1:41:14] increase. something along those lines.

[1:41:16] That way we could control and make sure

[1:41:20] that we continue with our u wilderness

[1:41:24] experience and uh protect the

[1:41:27] environment. So those are a whole lot of

[1:41:29] words and I'm happy to share this in an

[1:41:31] email, but uh if you did capture it and agree or disagree, I'd like to hear

[1:41:36] at least uh what your thoughts are uh

[1:41:39] Jeff and Derek on the points that I've

[1:41:42] made. Thank you.

[1:41:44] three crack.

[1:41:45] >> Thank you. Um, councelor Cooper, you've

[1:41:48] raised a lot of interesting points and certainly I'm not going to address

[1:41:51] all of them now because again this is

[1:41:53] the start. U what I will say is my

[1:41:56] comment with respect to the official

[1:41:58] plan not duplicating the zoning bylaw

[1:42:01] was not intended to suggest that there

[1:42:04] should not be a policy basis

[1:42:08] for everything that is in the zoning

[1:42:09] bylaw. there should and I think we've

[1:42:13] also got that situation here in our in

[1:42:16] our municipality where sometimes we have

[1:42:18] things in the zoning bylaw that don't

[1:42:20] have a policy basis. I think my comment

[1:42:23] is and again I think Derek wisely said

[1:42:25] that sometimes in an official plan you

[1:42:27] do use the word shall and and sometimes

[1:42:29] thresholds are important. Um, but I

[1:42:33] think uh [clears throat] what we will

[1:42:36] always keep in mind as we advise council

[1:42:38] and deal with the public and the working

[1:42:40] groups through this process is what we

[1:42:43] can and what we cannot do given that the

[1:42:47] municipality is a creature of the

[1:42:49] province and given given that the

[1:42:52] official plan is a document under the

[1:42:53] planning act and and I look forward to

[1:42:57] learning more from you as to your your

[1:42:59] comments with respect to percentage

[1:43:01] limitations. ations because as a planner

[1:43:03] I'm only aware of the opportunity to do

[1:43:06] so through what was called uh uh

[1:43:08] development permits

[1:43:10] and for reasons that escape me right now

[1:43:15] and there is a separate error posting

[1:43:17] regarding development permits which I

[1:43:19] haven't referenced in any of my

[1:43:20] materials because we do not yet have

[1:43:23] development permits in our official plan

[1:43:26] but for reasons beyond my comprehension

[1:43:29] there is not yet a role for development

[1:43:32] permits in Bill 98. That being said, we

[1:43:36] still don't know what the regulations

[1:43:38] will or will not be this fall. Um, but

[1:43:43] other than development permit systems,

[1:43:46] I'm unaware of the ability for

[1:43:48] municipalities to do those kinds of

[1:43:51] percentage limitations

[1:43:54] on minor variances.

[1:43:58] >> Mayor, if I could just one final

[1:43:59] comment. uh with respect to uh Jeff

[1:44:03] Gratzk's comments here.

[1:44:05] >> Please go ahead councelor Preco will be

[1:44:07] patient.

[1:44:08] >> It it'll just be a sentence and

[1:44:10] essentially I've had some consultation

[1:44:12] with a um a plan municipal lawyer also

[1:44:16] an environmental lawyer one and the

[1:44:18] same. And um apparently we have more

[1:44:23] authority than we think we do. And um I

[1:44:26] think we need to start pressing uh that

[1:44:29] point and understanding that we may have

[1:44:33] more strength in our ability as a

[1:44:36] municipality than we we uh think we can.

[1:44:38] And uh so that's what I've been told and

[1:44:40] I'm hoping that in the future we're

[1:44:42] going to press things a little bit more

[1:44:44] aggressively uh instead of being pushed

[1:44:47] around by

[1:44:48] the supposed upper level governments

[1:44:50] that uh tell us whether we how high

[1:44:53] we're supposed to jump. I I don't buy

[1:44:55] some of it. Thank you.

[1:44:57] >> Thank you,

[1:44:59] councelor Predco.

[1:45:01] >> Thank you. And through you uh your

[1:45:03] worship. Um I don't really have too much

[1:45:05] more to add. I think um I'm supportive

[1:45:07] of this whole approach and I'm really I

[1:45:08] just wanted to express um some um

[1:45:11] appreciation to our planning department

[1:45:14] and and uh Jeff and Director Whitlib um

[1:45:17] with regards to listening to the diverse

[1:45:20] voices that are in the room this

[1:45:21] morning. and uh I know you're going to

[1:45:23] be doing that going forward. So I'm I'm

[1:45:25] very confident that we have uh this in

[1:45:28] good hands. And then I only my only

[1:45:31] other comment was to make sure that as

[1:45:33] we go forward we are looking at um in

[1:45:36] our urban centers um affordable housing

[1:45:40] and how do we help streamline

[1:45:42] development and make sure that we can

[1:45:44] get our communities growing the way we

[1:45:46] want them to grow and make sure they're

[1:45:48] sustainable. That's all. Thank you.

[1:45:51] councelor Hazelton.

[1:45:55] >> Thank you. Um I want to touch on a

[1:45:56] couple of things and u I'm trying not to

[1:45:59] be repetitive. Um I think think there's

[1:46:02] lots of good uh conversation here, but

[1:46:04] we heard from um one in the audience who

[1:46:07] talked about um uh the what I well I

[1:46:12] will phrase as the need for compliance

[1:46:14] with policies

[1:46:16] um without the need for uh complaining

[1:46:20] about your neighbor. And one of the

[1:46:21] things that uh I observe in our township

[1:46:24] is that um uh and I've heard this over

[1:46:27] and over and over again. I heard it when

[1:46:29] I was campaigning in 2018. I heard it uh

[1:46:32] last week when I was out at a meeting um

[1:46:34] where everybody is basically saying, "We

[1:46:37] may not like the rules, but at least

[1:46:40] enforce the rules you have and I don't

[1:46:44] want to complain about my neighbor." So,

[1:46:47] how do we fix this dilemma? Because um

[1:46:53] we have chaos going out there going on

[1:46:55] out there in our township. We have all

[1:46:57] kinds of things going on that should

[1:46:59] never be done. We have clear-cutting of

[1:47:01] properties. Uh but you know if somebody

[1:47:04] doesn't complain then nothing is done.

[1:47:08] So we have to change this model because

[1:47:12] it is really irritating

[1:47:15] a large percentage of our residents who

[1:47:18] don't want to complain but are horrified

[1:47:22] at the things that are going on. So

[1:47:24] we've got to get out ahead of this. And

[1:47:25] I was delighted that uh the earlier

[1:47:27] speaker talked about this but I think

[1:47:29] that has to be very high on our agenda

[1:47:32] in the world in today's world of um you

[1:47:34] know uh commercial quality drones. uh

[1:47:38] what you can do with a uh commercial

[1:47:41] drone in the planning and the building

[1:47:43] department to find [snorts] things and

[1:47:45] inspect things and inspect things not

[1:47:47] only on day two but on day 200 and day

[1:47:50] 2000 because uh as we all know we've had

[1:47:53] applications come forward uh to council

[1:47:56] here and we have uh we have been told

[1:48:00] that oh I'm just going to put a wall in

[1:48:01] the middle middle of my building and

[1:48:03] claim that the other side of the wall is

[1:48:05] storage uh and it'll never be used for

[1:48:07] human habitation and uh you have to

[1:48:09] believe that uh but of course we know

[1:48:12] what's going to happen next year and the

[1:48:13] year after. So we really have to get a

[1:48:16] handle on this. This this can't be

[1:48:17] something left to uh to to fall off the

[1:48:20] edge of of the uh the table.

[1:48:24] The other topic, you know, first of all,

[1:48:26] I as I say, I think there's lots of good

[1:48:28] comments that have been made, but um

[1:48:31] you've heard uh a couple of times and

[1:48:33] I'm going to say it differently.

[1:48:36] We keep hearing at council

[1:48:39] about the rights of the individual

[1:48:42] to develop things on their property.

[1:48:46] What we don't hear is what are the

[1:48:49] rights of the community to establish

[1:48:53] guidelines for what they want in their

[1:48:56] community. Now, we've got lots of

[1:48:58] neighborhood plans in our community, and

[1:48:59] I understand that those are going to be

[1:49:01] uh, you know, hard perhaps to pull into

[1:49:04] the new Bill 98 structure. Uh, and I'm

[1:49:07] hoping that our excellent planning staff

[1:49:09] can figure out a way to do that. But

[1:49:12] what is really important for most people

[1:49:15] that I talk to is when you are trying to

[1:49:19] uh articulate what you want in your

[1:49:22] community

[1:49:23] and

[1:49:25] you are frustrated by the fact that

[1:49:27] there seem to be words in other

[1:49:30] documents that somehow imply that the

[1:49:32] property owner has the the right to do

[1:49:34] whatever he wants in spite of all of

[1:49:38] these constraints that are uh being

[1:49:40] crafted for that community. There's a

[1:49:42] disconnect there. And I don't have the

[1:49:44] answer to it, but I think we need to

[1:49:45] figure out how to deal with that. Uh

[1:49:48] because there is no point in having a

[1:49:50] neighborhood plan if you can't enforce

[1:49:53] it and if there is language in some

[1:49:56] other policies that let somebody do

[1:49:57] whatever they want. And you've heard

[1:49:59] this with respect to uh percentage

[1:50:01] increases and variances and uh and all

[1:50:04] kinds of other things. So I I I don't I

[1:50:07] don't want to blabber it too much, but I

[1:50:09] think we really need to identify that as

[1:50:12] a key uh topic to deal with going

[1:50:16] forward. Otherwise, we're wasting our

[1:50:19] time with uh an official plan and zoning

[1:50:21] bylaw. Thank you.

[1:50:24] >> Thank you,

[1:50:26] counselors. Any other comments you wish

[1:50:28] to make at today's meeting?

[1:50:34] All right, then I'm going to say if

[1:50:37] there are no further questions or

[1:50:38] comments, this concludes the special

[1:50:40] mean of planning council regarding the

[1:50:42] official plan comprehensive review.

[1:50:44] Thank you to everyone who participated

[1:50:46] today and all comments and submissions

[1:50:48] received will form part of the public

[1:50:49] record and will be considered as the

[1:50:51] official plan comprehensive review moves

[1:50:53] forward. There's no decision being made

[1:50:56] on a new official plan as part of

[1:50:58] today's meeting. Today's meeting is an

[1:50:59] opportunity to provide information,

[1:51:01] receive feedback, and hear from the

[1:51:03] community as the review process moves

[1:51:06] forward. And I'm going to repeat again

[1:51:08] off script, so to speak. As far as I'm

[1:51:11] concerned, we've opened the door. The

[1:51:13] door remains open. And I'm encouraging

[1:51:15] anybody and everybody and those who are

[1:51:18] watching now and those who may watch

[1:51:20] later and those who may talk to somebody

[1:51:21] else who talked to somebody else who

[1:51:23] watched if you got input please provide

[1:51:26] it one way or another because that is

[1:51:28] our intent is that we get um input from

[1:51:31] the the uh from everyone. Um, obviously

[1:51:34] the end result will be a compromise, but

[1:51:37] let's have a compromise that is as

[1:51:39] reasonable and fair and useful as

[1:51:43] possible. Um, so that that is uh I again

[1:51:47] I'm just going to say thank you very

[1:51:48] much for everybody's input. I really

[1:51:50] appreciate it and I really appreciate

[1:51:52] the interest and I think this process is

[1:51:55] we got we got a great staff to help make

[1:51:57] this process move forward. And um I have

[1:52:00] a motion to read and I am moved by

[1:52:02] councelor Bochek, seconded by councelor

[1:52:04] Cooper. Be it resolved, the council for

[1:52:07] the township of Georgian Bay accepts all

[1:52:09] information regarding the 202628

[1:52:12] Georgian Bay official plan comprehensive

[1:52:14] review in bill 98 new framework update

[1:52:17] review presented at the special meeting

[1:52:19] on August 26, 2026

[1:52:21] and two refers all set information

[1:52:23] comments to the township plan staff for

[1:52:25] further discussion with the indigenous

[1:52:27] communities, district staff, community

[1:52:29] groups and anyone who commented and

[1:52:31] anyone else and st and township staff

[1:52:34] shall not schedule the mean of councel

[1:52:36] to further consider what was heard at

[1:52:37] the special meeting and the review

[1:52:39] topics until after comments are

[1:52:41] addressed

[1:52:43] council all those in favor

[1:52:46] and that is carried thank you very much

[1:52:52] moved by councelor Predco seconded by

[1:52:54] councelor Jarvis be it resolve the plan

[1:52:57] council dots bylaw 2026-068

[1:53:00] to confirm the proceedings of the August

[1:53:01] 26 26 2026 special planning council

[1:53:05] meeting. All those in favor?

[1:53:08] And that is carried. And finally, move

[1:53:11] by councelor Gratziano, second by

[1:53:12] councelor Hazelton. Be it resolved that

[1:53:14] the plan council is now adjourned at

[1:53:16] 10:57 a.m.

[1:53:20] until September 15, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. or

[1:53:23] at the call of the chair. All those in

[1:53:25] favor. And we are now adjourned. Thank

[1:53:28] you. Thank you again, everyone. Thank

[1:53:30] you.

[1:53:34] All right.

[1:53:38] Let's

[1:53:49] go ahead. Okay.

Special Planning Council - 26 Aug 2026

Transcript