-
Share Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a new requirement that is contrary to Local Government Act regarding grandfathering. It states that "No replacement of materials" is allowed and this should be removed as it is clearly permitted by the Local Government Act. The Local Government Act allows maintenance and repairs that are non structural in nature which includes replacing materials such as roofing, siding, flooring, etc. Your answer below suggests that a window pane can be replaced but not a frame but this is contrary to the intent and interpretation of the Local Government Act. As long as the opening size in the structural wall is not increased the Local Government Act permits a replacement of an entire window unit including frame without additional regulatory requirements. on Facebook
Share Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a new requirement that is contrary to Local Government Act regarding grandfathering. It states that "No replacement of materials" is allowed and this should be removed as it is clearly permitted by the Local Government Act. The Local Government Act allows maintenance and repairs that are non structural in nature which includes replacing materials such as roofing, siding, flooring, etc. Your answer below suggests that a window pane can be replaced but not a frame but this is contrary to the intent and interpretation of the Local Government Act. As long as the opening size in the structural wall is not increased the Local Government Act permits a replacement of an entire window unit including frame without additional regulatory requirements. on Linkedin
Email Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a new requirement that is contrary to Local Government Act regarding grandfathering. It states that "No replacement of materials" is allowed and this should be removed as it is clearly permitted by the Local Government Act. The Local Government Act allows maintenance and repairs that are non structural in nature which includes replacing materials such as roofing, siding, flooring, etc. Your answer below suggests that a window pane can be replaced but not a frame but this is contrary to the intent and interpretation of the Local Government Act. As long as the opening size in the structural wall is not increased the Local Government Act permits a replacement of an entire window unit including frame without additional regulatory requirements. link
Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a new requirement that is contrary to Local Government Act regarding grandfathering. It states that "No replacement of materials" is allowed and this should be removed as it is clearly permitted by the Local Government Act. The Local Government Act allows maintenance and repairs that are non structural in nature which includes replacing materials such as roofing, siding, flooring, etc. Your answer below suggests that a window pane can be replaced but not a frame but this is contrary to the intent and interpretation of the Local Government Act. As long as the opening size in the structural wall is not increased the Local Government Act permits a replacement of an entire window unit including frame without additional regulatory requirements.
jherold
asked
11 days ago
We hear your, and others concerns, about the limitations of replacing materials for buildings in a setback. The information in the Building in a Setback Info Sheet is consistent with the RDKB's interpretation of what is permitted under the Local Government Act.
-
Share Just wanted to voice my concern with the setback and the permits that triger the need for expensive engineering to maintain a building with non structural changes. this is true for a 7.5M or 10M setback. There has to be a more economical way to allow the waterfront land owners to maintain their buildings. Not having a econnmical solution will lead to more unpermitted work being done. Please find a better way to allow work to be done in the setback. on Facebook
Share Just wanted to voice my concern with the setback and the permits that triger the need for expensive engineering to maintain a building with non structural changes. this is true for a 7.5M or 10M setback. There has to be a more economical way to allow the waterfront land owners to maintain their buildings. Not having a econnmical solution will lead to more unpermitted work being done. Please find a better way to allow work to be done in the setback. on Linkedin
Email Just wanted to voice my concern with the setback and the permits that triger the need for expensive engineering to maintain a building with non structural changes. this is true for a 7.5M or 10M setback. There has to be a more economical way to allow the waterfront land owners to maintain their buildings. Not having a econnmical solution will lead to more unpermitted work being done. Please find a better way to allow work to be done in the setback. link
Just wanted to voice my concern with the setback and the permits that triger the need for expensive engineering to maintain a building with non structural changes. this is true for a 7.5M or 10M setback. There has to be a more economical way to allow the waterfront land owners to maintain their buildings. Not having a econnmical solution will lead to more unpermitted work being done. Please find a better way to allow work to be done in the setback.
NorthEnd
asked
13 days ago
Thanks for your comments. We acknowledge your, and others, concerns with the current process for maintaining a building with the setback to Christina Lake. Although this is not something that can be resolved solely through this zoning bylaw update (as it involves the floodplain bylaw too), it is a something that we recognize as a serious issue.
-
Share Regarding previous comments on the Steering Committee:
It is my understanding that this committee was created by appointment, of the Regional Director who is the Chair of the Committee. As the Regional Director is a paid position, one could assert that it should be more than appropriate that they are made available to make comment or provide updates and feedback on the Committee and its processes on the committee's behalf. Without having specific knowledge of the Steering Committee and the criteria involved in the selection process of appointees, it is hard to know what community interests are being represented and if the group's diversity is an adequate representative cross section of the electorate.
At any rate, I think it is vital to the Regional Director's and Committee's accountability to the community to provide rationale for the guidance it provided the RDKB in Bylaw creation and amendments for this project. If none of the appointees are comfortable speaking in an open forum than at best the Chair of the Committee should be made available to provide clarity.
Reminder to ALL AREA C RESIDENTS... Next Town Hall, MARCH 9th! Get involved!
on Facebook
Share Regarding previous comments on the Steering Committee:
It is my understanding that this committee was created by appointment, of the Regional Director who is the Chair of the Committee. As the Regional Director is a paid position, one could assert that it should be more than appropriate that they are made available to make comment or provide updates and feedback on the Committee and its processes on the committee's behalf. Without having specific knowledge of the Steering Committee and the criteria involved in the selection process of appointees, it is hard to know what community interests are being represented and if the group's diversity is an adequate representative cross section of the electorate.
At any rate, I think it is vital to the Regional Director's and Committee's accountability to the community to provide rationale for the guidance it provided the RDKB in Bylaw creation and amendments for this project. If none of the appointees are comfortable speaking in an open forum than at best the Chair of the Committee should be made available to provide clarity.
Reminder to ALL AREA C RESIDENTS... Next Town Hall, MARCH 9th! Get involved!
on Linkedin
Email Regarding previous comments on the Steering Committee:
It is my understanding that this committee was created by appointment, of the Regional Director who is the Chair of the Committee. As the Regional Director is a paid position, one could assert that it should be more than appropriate that they are made available to make comment or provide updates and feedback on the Committee and its processes on the committee's behalf. Without having specific knowledge of the Steering Committee and the criteria involved in the selection process of appointees, it is hard to know what community interests are being represented and if the group's diversity is an adequate representative cross section of the electorate.
At any rate, I think it is vital to the Regional Director's and Committee's accountability to the community to provide rationale for the guidance it provided the RDKB in Bylaw creation and amendments for this project. If none of the appointees are comfortable speaking in an open forum than at best the Chair of the Committee should be made available to provide clarity.
Reminder to ALL AREA C RESIDENTS... Next Town Hall, MARCH 9th! Get involved!
link
Regarding previous comments on the Steering Committee:
It is my understanding that this committee was created by appointment, of the Regional Director who is the Chair of the Committee. As the Regional Director is a paid position, one could assert that it should be more than appropriate that they are made available to make comment or provide updates and feedback on the Committee and its processes on the committee's behalf. Without having specific knowledge of the Steering Committee and the criteria involved in the selection process of appointees, it is hard to know what community interests are being represented and if the group's diversity is an adequate representative cross section of the electorate.
At any rate, I think it is vital to the Regional Director's and Committee's accountability to the community to provide rationale for the guidance it provided the RDKB in Bylaw creation and amendments for this project. If none of the appointees are comfortable speaking in an open forum than at best the Chair of the Committee should be made available to provide clarity.
Reminder to ALL AREA C RESIDENTS... Next Town Hall, MARCH 9th! Get involved!
Timberdad21
asked
13 days ago
The primary purpose of the Steering Committee for this Zoning Bylaw Update is to provide informed advice based upon their previous involvement with the OCP review and their local knowledge. As such, it is made up by community members who graciously volunteered their time to serve on the OCP Steering Committee.
We would like to emphasize that anyone can provide their opinions and advice throughout the process, regardless of whether they serve on a committee.
-
Share I would like to question the validity and appropriateness of the fixed RV restriction dates of October 16 to April 14 in the draft zoning bylaw. These dates do not reflect the actual climate or usage patterns at Christina Lake. The shoulder seasons — particularly late September through early November and March through May — are well‑known for mild weather and are widely used by residents and visitors for extended recreational stays.
By imposing rigid dates that prohibit RV occupancy during periods when the climate is still suitable, the bylaw unnecessarily restricts how property owners can use their own land for seasonal enjoyment. There is no clear evidence that RV use during these shoulder months creates health, safety, or environmental risks that would justify such a limitation.
I respectfully request that the RDKB provide the rationale, data, or risk assessment used to determine these specific dates. If no such evidence exists, I ask that the dates be reconsidered, expanded, or removed entirely to better reflect Christina Lake’s actual seasonal conditions and to respect reasonable use of private property. on Facebook
Share I would like to question the validity and appropriateness of the fixed RV restriction dates of October 16 to April 14 in the draft zoning bylaw. These dates do not reflect the actual climate or usage patterns at Christina Lake. The shoulder seasons — particularly late September through early November and March through May — are well‑known for mild weather and are widely used by residents and visitors for extended recreational stays.
By imposing rigid dates that prohibit RV occupancy during periods when the climate is still suitable, the bylaw unnecessarily restricts how property owners can use their own land for seasonal enjoyment. There is no clear evidence that RV use during these shoulder months creates health, safety, or environmental risks that would justify such a limitation.
I respectfully request that the RDKB provide the rationale, data, or risk assessment used to determine these specific dates. If no such evidence exists, I ask that the dates be reconsidered, expanded, or removed entirely to better reflect Christina Lake’s actual seasonal conditions and to respect reasonable use of private property. on Linkedin
Email I would like to question the validity and appropriateness of the fixed RV restriction dates of October 16 to April 14 in the draft zoning bylaw. These dates do not reflect the actual climate or usage patterns at Christina Lake. The shoulder seasons — particularly late September through early November and March through May — are well‑known for mild weather and are widely used by residents and visitors for extended recreational stays.
By imposing rigid dates that prohibit RV occupancy during periods when the climate is still suitable, the bylaw unnecessarily restricts how property owners can use their own land for seasonal enjoyment. There is no clear evidence that RV use during these shoulder months creates health, safety, or environmental risks that would justify such a limitation.
I respectfully request that the RDKB provide the rationale, data, or risk assessment used to determine these specific dates. If no such evidence exists, I ask that the dates be reconsidered, expanded, or removed entirely to better reflect Christina Lake’s actual seasonal conditions and to respect reasonable use of private property. link
I would like to question the validity and appropriateness of the fixed RV restriction dates of October 16 to April 14 in the draft zoning bylaw. These dates do not reflect the actual climate or usage patterns at Christina Lake. The shoulder seasons — particularly late September through early November and March through May — are well‑known for mild weather and are widely used by residents and visitors for extended recreational stays.
By imposing rigid dates that prohibit RV occupancy during periods when the climate is still suitable, the bylaw unnecessarily restricts how property owners can use their own land for seasonal enjoyment. There is no clear evidence that RV use during these shoulder months creates health, safety, or environmental risks that would justify such a limitation.
I respectfully request that the RDKB provide the rationale, data, or risk assessment used to determine these specific dates. If no such evidence exists, I ask that the dates be reconsidered, expanded, or removed entirely to better reflect Christina Lake’s actual seasonal conditions and to respect reasonable use of private property.
Deanna Colley
asked
16 days ago
Thanks for your comments. We acknowledge the points you made about there being times during this specified period, where residents and visitors stay temporarily. We will consider your, and others, comments when updating the draft.
The date range was selected to be a 6-month period during the winter. This range was selected because there are less seasonal users and because there is greater safety risk during the winter because of snow loads, bad weather, and improper heating methods.
-
Share Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a requirement to “register a covenant on title” if an exemption is granted for a building or modification in a setback. Can you please provide an example of wording that would be acceptable to the RDKB to fulfill this requirement to be placed on a home title in the event of a minor modification requiring the replacement of materials with in a setback?
Thank you on Facebook
Share Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a requirement to “register a covenant on title” if an exemption is granted for a building or modification in a setback. Can you please provide an example of wording that would be acceptable to the RDKB to fulfill this requirement to be placed on a home title in the event of a minor modification requiring the replacement of materials with in a setback?
Thank you on Linkedin
Email Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a requirement to “register a covenant on title” if an exemption is granted for a building or modification in a setback. Can you please provide an example of wording that would be acceptable to the RDKB to fulfill this requirement to be placed on a home title in the event of a minor modification requiring the replacement of materials with in a setback?
Thank you link
Further to the Building in a Setback Info Sheet, on page 3 there is a requirement to “register a covenant on title” if an exemption is granted for a building or modification in a setback. Can you please provide an example of wording that would be acceptable to the RDKB to fulfill this requirement to be placed on a home title in the event of a minor modification requiring the replacement of materials with in a setback?
Thank you
Scout
asked
16 days ago
A covenant is required if an exemption to the Floodplain Bylaw is granted. The covenant would include the report by a qualified engineer that includes a statement that the dwelling is safe for the intended use. A copy of our standard template for floodplain covenant has been added to the Documents, which are located on the right hand side of this webpage.
-
Share As a secondary question about the failed window replacement…. In a situation where the window is broken such that it becomes an urgent safety and security risk (weather, wildlife or robbery), is a homeowner still expected to follow the lengthy process outlined? In an urgent situation such as a window broken during a wind storm, this process seems to be unsafe (due to the broken, jagged glass), unsecured (due to now the home has an opening making it susceptible to weather, infiltration of wildlife or unauthorized access) and untimely (as the broken window needs to be replaced immediately).
Please confirm. Thank you on Facebook
Share As a secondary question about the failed window replacement…. In a situation where the window is broken such that it becomes an urgent safety and security risk (weather, wildlife or robbery), is a homeowner still expected to follow the lengthy process outlined? In an urgent situation such as a window broken during a wind storm, this process seems to be unsafe (due to the broken, jagged glass), unsecured (due to now the home has an opening making it susceptible to weather, infiltration of wildlife or unauthorized access) and untimely (as the broken window needs to be replaced immediately).
Please confirm. Thank you on Linkedin
Email As a secondary question about the failed window replacement…. In a situation where the window is broken such that it becomes an urgent safety and security risk (weather, wildlife or robbery), is a homeowner still expected to follow the lengthy process outlined? In an urgent situation such as a window broken during a wind storm, this process seems to be unsafe (due to the broken, jagged glass), unsecured (due to now the home has an opening making it susceptible to weather, infiltration of wildlife or unauthorized access) and untimely (as the broken window needs to be replaced immediately).
Please confirm. Thank you link
As a secondary question about the failed window replacement…. In a situation where the window is broken such that it becomes an urgent safety and security risk (weather, wildlife or robbery), is a homeowner still expected to follow the lengthy process outlined? In an urgent situation such as a window broken during a wind storm, this process seems to be unsafe (due to the broken, jagged glass), unsecured (due to now the home has an opening making it susceptible to weather, infiltration of wildlife or unauthorized access) and untimely (as the broken window needs to be replaced immediately).
Please confirm. Thank you
Scout
asked
16 days ago
This minor repair would we allowed without planning permits (development variance permit or site-specific floodplain exemption).
-
Share Thank you for providing the Building in a Setback Info Sheet.
In a currently legal non-conforming property (built many years ago with all necessary permits at the time) a portion of which will be within the proposed 10m setback, can you please clarify a repair/maintenance question? If a window were to fail that sits within the 10m zone (either by normal wear or by a break during a storm) it would likely cost approximately $500 to replace. In order to have the window replaced, I believe would need to do the following according to the proposed bylaw update:
- apply to the RDKB for a development permit
- apply to the RDKB for a site-specific floodplain bylaw exemption which would include both an engineering report as well as an engineer’s flood assurance statement
- a building permit from the RDKB
- and, if successful in all the above, pay to have this repair added as a covenant to my home title
Is this correct for a failed window replacement?
Thank you on Facebook
Share Thank you for providing the Building in a Setback Info Sheet.
In a currently legal non-conforming property (built many years ago with all necessary permits at the time) a portion of which will be within the proposed 10m setback, can you please clarify a repair/maintenance question? If a window were to fail that sits within the 10m zone (either by normal wear or by a break during a storm) it would likely cost approximately $500 to replace. In order to have the window replaced, I believe would need to do the following according to the proposed bylaw update:
- apply to the RDKB for a development permit
- apply to the RDKB for a site-specific floodplain bylaw exemption which would include both an engineering report as well as an engineer’s flood assurance statement
- a building permit from the RDKB
- and, if successful in all the above, pay to have this repair added as a covenant to my home title
Is this correct for a failed window replacement?
Thank you on Linkedin
Email Thank you for providing the Building in a Setback Info Sheet.
In a currently legal non-conforming property (built many years ago with all necessary permits at the time) a portion of which will be within the proposed 10m setback, can you please clarify a repair/maintenance question? If a window were to fail that sits within the 10m zone (either by normal wear or by a break during a storm) it would likely cost approximately $500 to replace. In order to have the window replaced, I believe would need to do the following according to the proposed bylaw update:
- apply to the RDKB for a development permit
- apply to the RDKB for a site-specific floodplain bylaw exemption which would include both an engineering report as well as an engineer’s flood assurance statement
- a building permit from the RDKB
- and, if successful in all the above, pay to have this repair added as a covenant to my home title
Is this correct for a failed window replacement?
Thank you link
Thank you for providing the Building in a Setback Info Sheet.
In a currently legal non-conforming property (built many years ago with all necessary permits at the time) a portion of which will be within the proposed 10m setback, can you please clarify a repair/maintenance question? If a window were to fail that sits within the 10m zone (either by normal wear or by a break during a storm) it would likely cost approximately $500 to replace. In order to have the window replaced, I believe would need to do the following according to the proposed bylaw update:
- apply to the RDKB for a development permit
- apply to the RDKB for a site-specific floodplain bylaw exemption which would include both an engineering report as well as an engineer’s flood assurance statement
- a building permit from the RDKB
- and, if successful in all the above, pay to have this repair added as a covenant to my home title
Is this correct for a failed window replacement?
Thank you
Scout
asked
16 days ago
Thanks for the question and we acknowledge the difficulties involved with non-conforming situations. When making a determination of whether planning permits are needed, we evaluate what works are involved. We would consider repairing a broken window pane in the same window frame as a repair, if this was the only work being done. As such, it would not trigger the planning permits described above.
-
Share I attended the recent meeting on the updated OCP for Christina Lake. I asked two questions that I have not received an answer to.
1. Why are rv's limited to six months on private property, yet the same rv is allowed in a rv park year round. Many rv's are built for 4 season use, so that is NOT a reason.
2. Why April 15 to Nov 15? Not required if #1 is eliminated.
Further note I would think you are open to a legal challenge in allowing all round use in a rv park but not on private property. on Facebook
Share I attended the recent meeting on the updated OCP for Christina Lake. I asked two questions that I have not received an answer to.
1. Why are rv's limited to six months on private property, yet the same rv is allowed in a rv park year round. Many rv's are built for 4 season use, so that is NOT a reason.
2. Why April 15 to Nov 15? Not required if #1 is eliminated.
Further note I would think you are open to a legal challenge in allowing all round use in a rv park but not on private property. on Linkedin
Email I attended the recent meeting on the updated OCP for Christina Lake. I asked two questions that I have not received an answer to.
1. Why are rv's limited to six months on private property, yet the same rv is allowed in a rv park year round. Many rv's are built for 4 season use, so that is NOT a reason.
2. Why April 15 to Nov 15? Not required if #1 is eliminated.
Further note I would think you are open to a legal challenge in allowing all round use in a rv park but not on private property. link
I attended the recent meeting on the updated OCP for Christina Lake. I asked two questions that I have not received an answer to.
1. Why are rv's limited to six months on private property, yet the same rv is allowed in a rv park year round. Many rv's are built for 4 season use, so that is NOT a reason.
2. Why April 15 to Nov 15? Not required if #1 is eliminated.
Further note I would think you are open to a legal challenge in allowing all round use in a rv park but not on private property.
Brian Reiter
asked
17 days ago
Thanks for your questions and attending the public meeting. Under Section 302.4 of the draft bylaw, it is stated that “A person must not use a Recreational Vehicle or camping for residential purposes in any Zone.” This applies to all zones, including the RV parks that are zoned for a seasonal resort and for campgrounds zoned for a campground.
The RV parks you mentioned are zoned for seasonal resort and have the same limitation on occupancy.
There are two properties zoned for campgrounds and the limitation on occupancy was removed from the campground section that applies to these two properties. It allows for year-round operations to continue for commercial campground businesses that offer both summer and winter camping. It does not allow for year-round living.
-
Share I am struggling with Part 2 - 201..Delegations & Enforcement. I was under the impression that law enforcement needed to present a Search Warrant to gain entry to citizens’ homes. This sounds like a scenario from a totalitarian country, not Canada. This creates instability instead of the stability community requires. Why are you making this a Bylaw? on Facebook
Share I am struggling with Part 2 - 201..Delegations & Enforcement. I was under the impression that law enforcement needed to present a Search Warrant to gain entry to citizens’ homes. This sounds like a scenario from a totalitarian country, not Canada. This creates instability instead of the stability community requires. Why are you making this a Bylaw? on Linkedin
Email I am struggling with Part 2 - 201..Delegations & Enforcement. I was under the impression that law enforcement needed to present a Search Warrant to gain entry to citizens’ homes. This sounds like a scenario from a totalitarian country, not Canada. This creates instability instead of the stability community requires. Why are you making this a Bylaw? link
I am struggling with Part 2 - 201..Delegations & Enforcement. I was under the impression that law enforcement needed to present a Search Warrant to gain entry to citizens’ homes. This sounds like a scenario from a totalitarian country, not Canada. This creates instability instead of the stability community requires. Why are you making this a Bylaw?
JS
asked
19 days ago
There is no language in this bylaw to enter a home. This section speaks to entering a property, at reasonable times, in accordance with the Community Charter.
-
Share You may consider putting in a clause such as the following to appease some property owners who use their RVs on their property for family visits during the off-season.
“During the off-season between October and April, an RV on a residential property may be occupied for a cumulative total of up to 14 days for temporary guest accommodation.” on Facebook
Share You may consider putting in a clause such as the following to appease some property owners who use their RVs on their property for family visits during the off-season.
“During the off-season between October and April, an RV on a residential property may be occupied for a cumulative total of up to 14 days for temporary guest accommodation.” on Linkedin
Email You may consider putting in a clause such as the following to appease some property owners who use their RVs on their property for family visits during the off-season.
“During the off-season between October and April, an RV on a residential property may be occupied for a cumulative total of up to 14 days for temporary guest accommodation.” link
You may consider putting in a clause such as the following to appease some property owners who use their RVs on their property for family visits during the off-season.
“During the off-season between October and April, an RV on a residential property may be occupied for a cumulative total of up to 14 days for temporary guest accommodation.”
Laurie M.
asked
19 days ago
Thanks for the suggestion. We will consider it, and other comments, when updating the draft.
NEW-Draft Area C Zoning Bylaw-Updated January 2026 (1.08 MB) (pdf)
Thank you for your contribution!
Help us reach out to more people in the community
Share this with family and friends