Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project

Share Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project on Facebook Share Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project on Twitter Share Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project on Linkedin Email Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project link

The Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project is a targeted review and update to address known problems and to improve bylaw components that are unclear, inconsistent, or are challenging to administer or enforce. The outcome will be a new zoning bylaw with a new look and feel and a new bylaw number. Check out our FAQ section about what areas were focused on in the review.

It is proposed that draft Bylaw 2500 replace Bylaw 500. The first working version of draft Bylaw 2500 has been available for public review and comment since August 2022. Since then, the Bylaw has been updated based on community input, legal review, and further staff refinement. Please refer to the document library to review the draft bylaw and related documents.

Introducing Draft Bylaw 2500

Bylaw 2500 has a modernized look and feel and has been significantly reorganized. To review what is changing in Bylaw 2500 review the marked up version of the bylaw available in the document library and visit the FAQ section to learn more about the draft Bylaw 2500.

How can I get involved and learn more?

There are a number of ways to learn more and get involved in the project including:

  • Subscribe to this page to receive notifications of news and updates by clicking on follow project
  • Visit the document library and the FAQ section to learn more about the project background, public engagement results and to view the draft Bylaw 2500
  • Share your question below and we will provide an answer
  • Contact the project team directly at: bylaw500review@rdn.bc.ca

Want to learn more about how the proposed changes may affect your property?

Try the Proposed Zoning Map by clicking here or by clicking on the map image to the right. Once opened use your 9 digit PID number or address in the map search bar (located in the upper lefthand corner of the map) to view the current and proposed zoning excerpts that apply to your parcel. To access zoning information in the map tool, look for the (click here) link beside the zone in the blue property information bar on the right side of the map window as shown below.



The Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project is a targeted review and update to address known problems and to improve bylaw components that are unclear, inconsistent, or are challenging to administer or enforce. The outcome will be a new zoning bylaw with a new look and feel and a new bylaw number. Check out our FAQ section about what areas were focused on in the review.

It is proposed that draft Bylaw 2500 replace Bylaw 500. The first working version of draft Bylaw 2500 has been available for public review and comment since August 2022. Since then, the Bylaw has been updated based on community input, legal review, and further staff refinement. Please refer to the document library to review the draft bylaw and related documents.

Introducing Draft Bylaw 2500

Bylaw 2500 has a modernized look and feel and has been significantly reorganized. To review what is changing in Bylaw 2500 review the marked up version of the bylaw available in the document library and visit the FAQ section to learn more about the draft Bylaw 2500.

How can I get involved and learn more?

There are a number of ways to learn more and get involved in the project including:

  • Subscribe to this page to receive notifications of news and updates by clicking on follow project
  • Visit the document library and the FAQ section to learn more about the project background, public engagement results and to view the draft Bylaw 2500
  • Share your question below and we will provide an answer
  • Contact the project team directly at: bylaw500review@rdn.bc.ca

Want to learn more about how the proposed changes may affect your property?

Try the Proposed Zoning Map by clicking here or by clicking on the map image to the right. Once opened use your 9 digit PID number or address in the map search bar (located in the upper lefthand corner of the map) to view the current and proposed zoning excerpts that apply to your parcel. To access zoning information in the map tool, look for the (click here) link beside the zone in the blue property information bar on the right side of the map window as shown below.



Have a question about this project? You ask, we have answers.

You need to be signed in to add your question.

  • Share Hello, I would like to gather some more information about the proposed bylaw changes. Specially on backyard poultry in the RS2 zoning. Currently RS2 zoning has no maximum for backyard poultry or any restrictions on roosters. Will this be staying the same in the new proposed bylaw? Thank you on Facebook Share Hello, I would like to gather some more information about the proposed bylaw changes. Specially on backyard poultry in the RS2 zoning. Currently RS2 zoning has no maximum for backyard poultry or any restrictions on roosters. Will this be staying the same in the new proposed bylaw? Thank you on Twitter Share Hello, I would like to gather some more information about the proposed bylaw changes. Specially on backyard poultry in the RS2 zoning. Currently RS2 zoning has no maximum for backyard poultry or any restrictions on roosters. Will this be staying the same in the new proposed bylaw? Thank you on Linkedin Email Hello, I would like to gather some more information about the proposed bylaw changes. Specially on backyard poultry in the RS2 zoning. Currently RS2 zoning has no maximum for backyard poultry or any restrictions on roosters. Will this be staying the same in the new proposed bylaw? Thank you link

    Hello, I would like to gather some more information about the proposed bylaw changes. Specially on backyard poultry in the RS2 zoning. Currently RS2 zoning has no maximum for backyard poultry or any restrictions on roosters. Will this be staying the same in the new proposed bylaw? Thank you

    Reasthom asked about 2 months ago

    Thank you for your question. There are no changes being proposed by Bylaw 2500 with respect to the keeping of animals or household poultry. More information is required to answer your question in a way which is specific to the property you are inquiring about. 

    If a parcel is zoned RS2 and is more than 1,000 m2 in area, there is no maximum number poultry that can be kept provided the poultry is used primarily and directly by the household and not for sale or profit. 

    The term poultry is defined as domesticated birds kept for eggs, meat, feathers, hide, or cosmetic or medicinal purposes, and includes broilers, Cornish hens, layers, breeding stock, replacement pullets, roosters, ducks, geese, turkeys, game birds, and ratites. 

    If an RS2 zoned parcel is less than 1,000 m2, the keeping of poultry is limited by the bylaw to a maximum of 5 hens or ducks per parcel and no roosters are permitted. 

    Please refer to the keeping of animals section of the bylaw for the full set of regulations. 

  • Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? What is the difference between CMSF and CRRF? on Facebook Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? What is the difference between CMSF and CRRF? on Twitter Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? What is the difference between CMSF and CRRF? on Linkedin Email How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? What is the difference between CMSF and CRRF? link

    How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? What is the difference between CMSF and CRRF?

    rbaarons asked 3 months ago

    The proposed Commercial Resort & Recreation  is very similar to the current zone. If you wish to do a side-by-side comparison, try the project webmap as it provides you with the ability to open the current and proposed zones,

  • Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? on Facebook Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? on Twitter Share How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? on Linkedin Email How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort? link

    How will the change in Area E affect the Pacific Shores Resort?

    rbaarons asked 3 months ago

    Please see our response to your previous question. 

  • Share How will this bylaw change in Area E affect not the Pacific Shores resort but privately owned condos on the property? on Facebook Share How will this bylaw change in Area E affect not the Pacific Shores resort but privately owned condos on the property? on Twitter Share How will this bylaw change in Area E affect not the Pacific Shores resort but privately owned condos on the property? on Linkedin Email How will this bylaw change in Area E affect not the Pacific Shores resort but privately owned condos on the property? link

    How will this bylaw change in Area E affect not the Pacific Shores resort but privately owned condos on the property?

    rbaarons asked 3 months ago

    Bylaw 2500 proposes to change the zoning from Commercial 5 to Commercial Resort & Recreation. The propsoed changes result from the consolidation of commercial zones that had slight differences between them. The result would be fewer zones and a simplified bylaw. From a practical perspective, we do not anticipate that the changes proposed would have negative impacts on the development at this site as the uses in the zone related to this development are not proposed to change. The proposed zone continues to support resort condominium and one dwelling unit per parcel. If you wish to review the current and proposed zones, they can easily be accessed using the project map.

  • Share If I were to build multiple buildings that all house livestock which are less than 10m2 each and place them a few meters apart, would the 10m2 setback still apply or would I be required to sum the total area of these buildings (eg 30m2 if I built 3 buildings) and then apply the setback applicable to a 30m2 building instead? Curious how this would be viewed given the reason for the varying setbacks for different sized buildings is directly related to the number of livestock and the off-site impacts of odour, dust, and noise that a larger number of animals would present which would be the case with multiple buildings. on Facebook Share If I were to build multiple buildings that all house livestock which are less than 10m2 each and place them a few meters apart, would the 10m2 setback still apply or would I be required to sum the total area of these buildings (eg 30m2 if I built 3 buildings) and then apply the setback applicable to a 30m2 building instead? Curious how this would be viewed given the reason for the varying setbacks for different sized buildings is directly related to the number of livestock and the off-site impacts of odour, dust, and noise that a larger number of animals would present which would be the case with multiple buildings. on Twitter Share If I were to build multiple buildings that all house livestock which are less than 10m2 each and place them a few meters apart, would the 10m2 setback still apply or would I be required to sum the total area of these buildings (eg 30m2 if I built 3 buildings) and then apply the setback applicable to a 30m2 building instead? Curious how this would be viewed given the reason for the varying setbacks for different sized buildings is directly related to the number of livestock and the off-site impacts of odour, dust, and noise that a larger number of animals would present which would be the case with multiple buildings. on Linkedin Email If I were to build multiple buildings that all house livestock which are less than 10m2 each and place them a few meters apart, would the 10m2 setback still apply or would I be required to sum the total area of these buildings (eg 30m2 if I built 3 buildings) and then apply the setback applicable to a 30m2 building instead? Curious how this would be viewed given the reason for the varying setbacks for different sized buildings is directly related to the number of livestock and the off-site impacts of odour, dust, and noise that a larger number of animals would present which would be the case with multiple buildings. link

    If I were to build multiple buildings that all house livestock which are less than 10m2 each and place them a few meters apart, would the 10m2 setback still apply or would I be required to sum the total area of these buildings (eg 30m2 if I built 3 buildings) and then apply the setback applicable to a 30m2 building instead? Curious how this would be viewed given the reason for the varying setbacks for different sized buildings is directly related to the number of livestock and the off-site impacts of odour, dust, and noise that a larger number of animals would present which would be the case with multiple buildings.

    Mmudford asked over 1 year ago

    Bylaw 500 specifies that an 8.0 metre minimum setback requirement applies to all buildings and structures less than 10m2 that house livestock. There is no limit to the number of buildings this size or less. Please note that changes to this section of the bylaw are not within the scope of this project and are therefore not being contemplated. 

  • Share Can you please explain why the setbacks for buildings and structures that house livestock or poultry are different for buildings that are 10 m2 or less, 50 m2 or less and greater than 50 m2? on Facebook Share Can you please explain why the setbacks for buildings and structures that house livestock or poultry are different for buildings that are 10 m2 or less, 50 m2 or less and greater than 50 m2? on Twitter Share Can you please explain why the setbacks for buildings and structures that house livestock or poultry are different for buildings that are 10 m2 or less, 50 m2 or less and greater than 50 m2? on Linkedin Email Can you please explain why the setbacks for buildings and structures that house livestock or poultry are different for buildings that are 10 m2 or less, 50 m2 or less and greater than 50 m2? link

    Can you please explain why the setbacks for buildings and structures that house livestock or poultry are different for buildings that are 10 m2 or less, 50 m2 or less and greater than 50 m2?

    Mmudford asked over 1 year ago

    Thank you for your question. The rationale is that in general terms a smaller building would house fewer livestock than a larger building and thereby less likely to result in off-site impacts related to odour, dust, and noise. 

  • Share Is this review considering the two land management/zoning tools of residential density transfer between parcels and conservation community development on one parcel of land? on Facebook Share Is this review considering the two land management/zoning tools of residential density transfer between parcels and conservation community development on one parcel of land? on Twitter Share Is this review considering the two land management/zoning tools of residential density transfer between parcels and conservation community development on one parcel of land? on Linkedin Email Is this review considering the two land management/zoning tools of residential density transfer between parcels and conservation community development on one parcel of land? link

    Is this review considering the two land management/zoning tools of residential density transfer between parcels and conservation community development on one parcel of land?

    david haley asked over 1 year ago

    No its not. The Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project is a targeted review based on 14 focus areas and includes three phases. Density transfer may be a idea that could be considered in a future phase. If you would like to discuss this idea further, please email us at bylaw500reveiw@rdn.bc.ca. 

  • Share Who can complete the survey? on Facebook Share Who can complete the survey? on Twitter Share Who can complete the survey? on Linkedin Email Who can complete the survey? link

    Who can complete the survey?

    over 1 year ago

    Anyone who resides in or has an interest in property in Electoral Areas A, C, E, G, and H of the Regional District of Nanaimo. 

  • Share How do large fabric building fall into the structures definition? I see many that appear permanent and likely put up without permit. (I did check your GIS mapbase) Is there a size that requires permit? 20x30ft? on Facebook Share How do large fabric building fall into the structures definition? I see many that appear permanent and likely put up without permit. (I did check your GIS mapbase) Is there a size that requires permit? 20x30ft? on Twitter Share How do large fabric building fall into the structures definition? I see many that appear permanent and likely put up without permit. (I did check your GIS mapbase) Is there a size that requires permit? 20x30ft? on Linkedin Email How do large fabric building fall into the structures definition? I see many that appear permanent and likely put up without permit. (I did check your GIS mapbase) Is there a size that requires permit? 20x30ft? link

    How do large fabric building fall into the structures definition? I see many that appear permanent and likely put up without permit. (I did check your GIS mapbase) Is there a size that requires permit? 20x30ft?

    Greenwave asked about 2 years ago

    Generally speaking fabric buildings of any size are considered a building that must meet the applicable minimum setback requirements. If you are ever in doubt, please contact the planning department by email to askplanning@rdn.bc.ca or call us at (250) 390- 6510 and ask to speak with a Planner. With respect to building permit requirements for the erection of these types of buildings please contact the RDN Building Inspection Services Department at (250) 390-4111.

  • Share I do not understand the continued objection against subdividing or stratification of rural residential properties. The proposal to; "Add a regulation to limit strata by requiring a second dwelling to be built a minimum of one year after occupancy of the first dwelling", will result in fewer second home being built. I assume this is the objective, but this is counter to the need for more housing and affordable housing. Rural residential is a luxury and is a poor use of residential lands when at low density. It costs the more per household for services such as roads, school busing and garbage pickup. Rural residential should have density increased to reduce these costs and provide more housing. I am sure if you canvased Ru land owners they would be happy with 2 acre lots to provide them with the rural integrity of the current zoning definition. on Facebook Share I do not understand the continued objection against subdividing or stratification of rural residential properties. The proposal to; "Add a regulation to limit strata by requiring a second dwelling to be built a minimum of one year after occupancy of the first dwelling", will result in fewer second home being built. I assume this is the objective, but this is counter to the need for more housing and affordable housing. Rural residential is a luxury and is a poor use of residential lands when at low density. It costs the more per household for services such as roads, school busing and garbage pickup. Rural residential should have density increased to reduce these costs and provide more housing. I am sure if you canvased Ru land owners they would be happy with 2 acre lots to provide them with the rural integrity of the current zoning definition. on Twitter Share I do not understand the continued objection against subdividing or stratification of rural residential properties. The proposal to; "Add a regulation to limit strata by requiring a second dwelling to be built a minimum of one year after occupancy of the first dwelling", will result in fewer second home being built. I assume this is the objective, but this is counter to the need for more housing and affordable housing. Rural residential is a luxury and is a poor use of residential lands when at low density. It costs the more per household for services such as roads, school busing and garbage pickup. Rural residential should have density increased to reduce these costs and provide more housing. I am sure if you canvased Ru land owners they would be happy with 2 acre lots to provide them with the rural integrity of the current zoning definition. on Linkedin Email I do not understand the continued objection against subdividing or stratification of rural residential properties. The proposal to; "Add a regulation to limit strata by requiring a second dwelling to be built a minimum of one year after occupancy of the first dwelling", will result in fewer second home being built. I assume this is the objective, but this is counter to the need for more housing and affordable housing. Rural residential is a luxury and is a poor use of residential lands when at low density. It costs the more per household for services such as roads, school busing and garbage pickup. Rural residential should have density increased to reduce these costs and provide more housing. I am sure if you canvased Ru land owners they would be happy with 2 acre lots to provide them with the rural integrity of the current zoning definition. link

    I do not understand the continued objection against subdividing or stratification of rural residential properties. The proposal to; "Add a regulation to limit strata by requiring a second dwelling to be built a minimum of one year after occupancy of the first dwelling", will result in fewer second home being built. I assume this is the objective, but this is counter to the need for more housing and affordable housing. Rural residential is a luxury and is a poor use of residential lands when at low density. It costs the more per household for services such as roads, school busing and garbage pickup. Rural residential should have density increased to reduce these costs and provide more housing. I am sure if you canvased Ru land owners they would be happy with 2 acre lots to provide them with the rural integrity of the current zoning definition.

    Greenwave asked about 2 years ago

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts. The Bylaw 500 Review and Update Project is not proposing to change the minimum parcel sizes. The proposal to address building strata is to recognize a long-standing concern around this form of subdivision which is not reviewed by the RDN or the provincial subdivision approving officer. It relies on a provision of the strata property act being applied in a way that it was not likely intended to.  Over the years, this has resulted in the potential loss of opportunity for park land acquisition as well as road and drainage improvements at the time of subdivision. The proposed amendments would continue to allow the existing permitted density. Where supported by the applicable Official Community Plans, building strata conversion would continue to be an option for those who chose to stratify the units.

Page last updated: 23 Apr 2024, 12:54 PM