[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.