Riparian Area and Ocean Shoreline Protection Bylaw Amendments

Share Riparian Area and Ocean Shoreline Protection Bylaw Amendments on Facebook Share Riparian Area and Ocean Shoreline Protection Bylaw Amendments on Twitter Share Riparian Area and Ocean Shoreline Protection Bylaw Amendments on Linkedin Email Riparian Area and Ocean Shoreline Protection Bylaw Amendments link

Consultation has concluded on this project.

In June 2023, the Sunshine Coast Regional District (SCRD) initiated the process to amend Zoning Bylaw 337 and 722 in order to strengthen protection of riparian areas (fresh watercourses / waterbodies) and ocean shorelines within the SCRD's Electoral Areas. 

A Public Hearing took place on July 16, 2024 to allow the community to provide their views to their elected representatives on the adoption of the amended zoning bylaws. 

  On the right side of the page, you will find video of the public hearing, the public hearing information binder and a presentation provided at the public hearing.

Read more about the proposed amendments below.


The proposed Amendment Bylaws 722.9 and 337.123 involve four key components and are intended to achieve a combination of alignment with the intent of provincial legislation, and consistency with provincial guidelines relating to industry standards. There are four specific amendments, which are described, as follows:

  1. A proposed amendment to the bylaw calculation of parcel area for subdivision. Action is required related to this proposed amendment, to align this align SCRD Bylaws 722 and 337 with the intent of provincial legislation. This proposed amendment applies to all electoral areas.
  2. A proposed amendment to achieve a minimum 17-metre setback for buildings and structures from wetlands and creeks. Action is required related to this proposed amendment, to align SCRD Bylaw 337 with the intent of provincial legislation. This proposed amendment applies to Area A only and is consistent with regulations existing in all other electoral areas, under Bylaw 722.
  3. A proposed amendment to provide a 5-metre buffer to Streamside Protection and Enhancement Areas. This proposed amendment is an optional consideration to address challenges with infractions and development encroachment. This proposed amendment applies to Bylaw 337 and 722 (all electoral areas).
  4. A proposed amendment to provide a 15-metre setback for buildings from the ocean. This proposed amendment is an optional consideration to provide alignment of Bylaw 337 with provincial guidelines intended to inform local governments of industry standards that mitigate risks associated with climate adaptation. This proposed amendment applies to Area A only and is consistent with regulations existing in all other electoral areas, under Bylaw 722.


  On the bottom of the page, you can ask questions about the proposed amendments.

In June 2023, the Sunshine Coast Regional District (SCRD) initiated the process to amend Zoning Bylaw 337 and 722 in order to strengthen protection of riparian areas (fresh watercourses / waterbodies) and ocean shorelines within the SCRD's Electoral Areas. 

A Public Hearing took place on July 16, 2024 to allow the community to provide their views to their elected representatives on the adoption of the amended zoning bylaws. 

  On the right side of the page, you will find video of the public hearing, the public hearing information binder and a presentation provided at the public hearing.

Read more about the proposed amendments below.


The proposed Amendment Bylaws 722.9 and 337.123 involve four key components and are intended to achieve a combination of alignment with the intent of provincial legislation, and consistency with provincial guidelines relating to industry standards. There are four specific amendments, which are described, as follows:

  1. A proposed amendment to the bylaw calculation of parcel area for subdivision. Action is required related to this proposed amendment, to align this align SCRD Bylaws 722 and 337 with the intent of provincial legislation. This proposed amendment applies to all electoral areas.
  2. A proposed amendment to achieve a minimum 17-metre setback for buildings and structures from wetlands and creeks. Action is required related to this proposed amendment, to align SCRD Bylaw 337 with the intent of provincial legislation. This proposed amendment applies to Area A only and is consistent with regulations existing in all other electoral areas, under Bylaw 722.
  3. A proposed amendment to provide a 5-metre buffer to Streamside Protection and Enhancement Areas. This proposed amendment is an optional consideration to address challenges with infractions and development encroachment. This proposed amendment applies to Bylaw 337 and 722 (all electoral areas).
  4. A proposed amendment to provide a 15-metre setback for buildings from the ocean. This proposed amendment is an optional consideration to provide alignment of Bylaw 337 with provincial guidelines intended to inform local governments of industry standards that mitigate risks associated with climate adaptation. This proposed amendment applies to Area A only and is consistent with regulations existing in all other electoral areas, under Bylaw 722.


  On the bottom of the page, you can ask questions about the proposed amendments.

Consultation has concluded on this project.

Please note that your question will not form part of the public record for the Public Hearing. To provide your feedback (support, opposition, general feedback) for Board consideration, please visit www.scrd.ca/public-hearings.

  • Share The 15 m setback seems to miss two important points. One, it does not account for vertical changes within the 15 m. Two, it values the first meter equally with the last meter. Much of our coast line is near vertical bluff and damage in the first meter should merit more concern than the last. on Facebook Share The 15 m setback seems to miss two important points. One, it does not account for vertical changes within the 15 m. Two, it values the first meter equally with the last meter. Much of our coast line is near vertical bluff and damage in the first meter should merit more concern than the last. on Twitter Share The 15 m setback seems to miss two important points. One, it does not account for vertical changes within the 15 m. Two, it values the first meter equally with the last meter. Much of our coast line is near vertical bluff and damage in the first meter should merit more concern than the last. on Linkedin Email The 15 m setback seems to miss two important points. One, it does not account for vertical changes within the 15 m. Two, it values the first meter equally with the last meter. Much of our coast line is near vertical bluff and damage in the first meter should merit more concern than the last. link

    The 15 m setback seems to miss two important points. One, it does not account for vertical changes within the 15 m. Two, it values the first meter equally with the last meter. Much of our coast line is near vertical bluff and damage in the first meter should merit more concern than the last.

    Peteonbeach asked 5 months ago

    Thanks for reaching out.

    Zoning bylaws for setbacks from the ocean are designed to protect both the natural environment and human structures from the potential impacts of coastal hazards, such as erosion and flooding. The 15-meter setback is a widely adopted provincial standard that aims to provide a development buffer zone to reduce the risk of property damage and to help preserve coastal ecosystems.

    You are correct that a flat 15-meter setback does not account for vertical changes in coastal terrain, such as cliffs or bluffs. In cases where the coastline features significant vertical elevation changes, such as a near-vertical bluff, the standard setback may or may not adequately address the risk associated with these features. To address these concerns, the SCRD has a Coastal Slope Development Permit Area regulation that is applied via the Official Community Plan in areas with significant vertical changes. This permit process involves an assessment of the site to ensure that construction is safe and does not exacerbate erosion or other hazards. These assessments help to identify the safest building sites and determine whether a relaxation of the setback from the ocean is appropriate through the variance process. 

    If you have questions about a specific parcel, please contact our development planning team to discuss: https://www.scrd.ca/planning 

  • Share Where are all the letters that were sent to the public hearing? I don't see all of them in the binder. on Facebook Share Where are all the letters that were sent to the public hearing? I don't see all of them in the binder. on Twitter Share Where are all the letters that were sent to the public hearing? I don't see all of them in the binder. on Linkedin Email Where are all the letters that were sent to the public hearing? I don't see all of them in the binder. link

    Where are all the letters that were sent to the public hearing? I don't see all of them in the binder.

    D asked 4 months ago

    Hi, Thanks for your question. 

    All written submissions received before the deadline on July 16, 2024, at 12 noon are included in the Public Hearing Information Binder. The binder is available online for review and the submissions will be included in a future staff report to the SCRD Board.

    Here is the link to the Public Hearing website which includes links to the binder and the recorded public hearing, and more: https://www.scrd.ca/public-hearings/  

    Alternatively, the public hearing binder and recording are also available on the let’s talk page: https://letstalk.scrd.ca/micro-policy-fix

  • Share Currently bylaw 722 allows for multiple property types to build within a very short distance of 5ft from a property line. This isn't good for tree retention between neighbours and often causes conflict. It also then causes folks to by non native often invasive laurels to create a privacy screen. If we are trying to protect riparian areas as well as look into implementing more tree retention would it not be better to make this distance greater, so that folks can't build so close to the property lines. on Facebook Share Currently bylaw 722 allows for multiple property types to build within a very short distance of 5ft from a property line. This isn't good for tree retention between neighbours and often causes conflict. It also then causes folks to by non native often invasive laurels to create a privacy screen. If we are trying to protect riparian areas as well as look into implementing more tree retention would it not be better to make this distance greater, so that folks can't build so close to the property lines. on Twitter Share Currently bylaw 722 allows for multiple property types to build within a very short distance of 5ft from a property line. This isn't good for tree retention between neighbours and often causes conflict. It also then causes folks to by non native often invasive laurels to create a privacy screen. If we are trying to protect riparian areas as well as look into implementing more tree retention would it not be better to make this distance greater, so that folks can't build so close to the property lines. on Linkedin Email Currently bylaw 722 allows for multiple property types to build within a very short distance of 5ft from a property line. This isn't good for tree retention between neighbours and often causes conflict. It also then causes folks to by non native often invasive laurels to create a privacy screen. If we are trying to protect riparian areas as well as look into implementing more tree retention would it not be better to make this distance greater, so that folks can't build so close to the property lines. link

    Currently bylaw 722 allows for multiple property types to build within a very short distance of 5ft from a property line. This isn't good for tree retention between neighbours and often causes conflict. It also then causes folks to by non native often invasive laurels to create a privacy screen. If we are trying to protect riparian areas as well as look into implementing more tree retention would it not be better to make this distance greater, so that folks can't build so close to the property lines.

    Jenny Roan asked 5 months ago

    Thank you for your concern and suggestion regarding setbacks and tree retention between properties. 

    Firstly, it's important to note that the current focus of the zoning bylaw amendments pertains specifically to setbacks from fresh and marine waterbodies, aiming to enhance protection of riparian areas and streams within our region, while also updating the SCRD bylaws to meet legislative requirements and provincial guidelines.

    Regarding your suggestion to increase the distance between properties to prevent building close to property lines, this issue falls outside the scope of the current bylaw amendments. Setbacks between properties are addressed under different sections of the zoning bylaw.

  • Share Pls confirm that bylaws affect new developments only and existing structures are grandfathered Does this affect minimum distances from a stream on a neighbour’s property? on Facebook Share Pls confirm that bylaws affect new developments only and existing structures are grandfathered Does this affect minimum distances from a stream on a neighbour’s property? on Twitter Share Pls confirm that bylaws affect new developments only and existing structures are grandfathered Does this affect minimum distances from a stream on a neighbour’s property? on Linkedin Email Pls confirm that bylaws affect new developments only and existing structures are grandfathered Does this affect minimum distances from a stream on a neighbour’s property? link

    Pls confirm that bylaws affect new developments only and existing structures are grandfathered Does this affect minimum distances from a stream on a neighbour’s property?

    Mark asked 5 months ago

    Thank you for your questions. 

    Your first question relates to “non-confirming uses”. At the time a new land use regulation bylaw is adopted, if an existing use building is lawfully used and it does not conform to the bylaw, then it may be continued as a legal non-conforming use. If the use and density of an existing building conforms to a new land use regulation bylaw, but the building’s siting, size or dimensions do not, the building may be maintained, extended or altered as long as it does not result in further contravention of the bylaw. Any new use of land or a building is subject to the new bylaw.

    To learn more about non-conforming uses, I encourage you to review Local Government Act, Part 14, Division 14 – Non-conforming Use and Other Continuations.

    The answer to your second question is no. Zoning setbacks regulate the siting of buildings and structures, not existing property lines.

  • Share A major justification for these changes are stated to be a requirement to comply with Provincial requirements. What are these laws? Could you cite the Act and sections? The changes will restrict our ability to use and enjoy our properties, so we want to know whether these are actual laws, guidelines or best practices. on Facebook Share A major justification for these changes are stated to be a requirement to comply with Provincial requirements. What are these laws? Could you cite the Act and sections? The changes will restrict our ability to use and enjoy our properties, so we want to know whether these are actual laws, guidelines or best practices. on Twitter Share A major justification for these changes are stated to be a requirement to comply with Provincial requirements. What are these laws? Could you cite the Act and sections? The changes will restrict our ability to use and enjoy our properties, so we want to know whether these are actual laws, guidelines or best practices. on Linkedin Email A major justification for these changes are stated to be a requirement to comply with Provincial requirements. What are these laws? Could you cite the Act and sections? The changes will restrict our ability to use and enjoy our properties, so we want to know whether these are actual laws, guidelines or best practices. link

    A major justification for these changes are stated to be a requirement to comply with Provincial requirements. What are these laws? Could you cite the Act and sections? The changes will restrict our ability to use and enjoy our properties, so we want to know whether these are actual laws, guidelines or best practices.

    Rubylaker asked 5 months ago

    Thank you for your question. Here are some key reference materials which informed the proposed amendments. 

    General materials 

    Ocean Setback increase to Bylaw 337

    Freshwater setback increases to Bylaw 337

    Subdivision Calculation (Both bylaws 722 and 337)

    SPEA Buffer (Both bylaws 722 and 337)

  • Share Hi is it possible for multiple information sessions before the hearing .The subject dramaticly affects numerous residents negatively on Facebook Share Hi is it possible for multiple information sessions before the hearing .The subject dramaticly affects numerous residents negatively on Twitter Share Hi is it possible for multiple information sessions before the hearing .The subject dramaticly affects numerous residents negatively on Linkedin Email Hi is it possible for multiple information sessions before the hearing .The subject dramaticly affects numerous residents negatively link

    Hi is it possible for multiple information sessions before the hearing .The subject dramaticly affects numerous residents negatively

    rsc asked 5 months ago

    A Public Information Meeting was held on July 4th the purpose of which was to answer questions from community members through one on one and small group discussions. The next scheduled engagement opportunity is the Public Hearing on July 16 at 7PM. At the Public Hearing, community members will be given an opportunity to provide their views to the SCRD Board on the proposed bylaw amendments. After the closing of the public hearing , the Board may do one of the following: adopt or defeat the bylaw, or direct staff to alter the bylaw and then either do additional engagement or adopt the bylaw. 

    Learn more about the public hearing here: https://www.scrd.ca/public-hearings 

  • Share Will existng facilites be grandfathered in under this bylaw change. The ocean front property has had stairs and steps to the high water mark for over 30 years. I have seen the term "legal non-conforming". What does this mean? Are my stairs legal non- conforming? on Facebook Share Will existng facilites be grandfathered in under this bylaw change. The ocean front property has had stairs and steps to the high water mark for over 30 years. I have seen the term "legal non-conforming". What does this mean? Are my stairs legal non- conforming? on Twitter Share Will existng facilites be grandfathered in under this bylaw change. The ocean front property has had stairs and steps to the high water mark for over 30 years. I have seen the term "legal non-conforming". What does this mean? Are my stairs legal non- conforming? on Linkedin Email Will existng facilites be grandfathered in under this bylaw change. The ocean front property has had stairs and steps to the high water mark for over 30 years. I have seen the term "legal non-conforming". What does this mean? Are my stairs legal non- conforming? link

    Will existng facilites be grandfathered in under this bylaw change. The ocean front property has had stairs and steps to the high water mark for over 30 years. I have seen the term "legal non-conforming". What does this mean? Are my stairs legal non- conforming?

    Frank B asked 5 months ago

    Thanks for your question, 

    The zoning setback from the natural boundary of the ocean is for the development of buildings and structures. Per SCRD zoning bylaws, pathways and stairs to the ocean area not considered a “building” or a “structure” (unless the are large in scope and/or require retaining walls over 2m - in which case these would be a “structure” and require a Building permit and comply with zoning setback) and therefore the setback does not apply. If your path and stairs are small in scale, then you are in compliance with the zoning bylaw. 

    Please note – Freshwater (streams, wetlands, lakes, etc.) setbacks are treated differently than ocean setbacks. Any land alteration (building, tree cutting, etc.) within 30 metres of a freshwater waterbody or the top of bank requires an SCRD Development Permit and a Riparian Area Protection Regulation Assessment.

  • Share Our waterfront home and about two dozen homes adjacent to use a gravel road to access our homes. This road is about ten feet above the high tide mark but two dozen homes use this road to access their homes. Power lines run along this road. How will esplanade homes like ours be affected by the setback changes? on Facebook Share Our waterfront home and about two dozen homes adjacent to use a gravel road to access our homes. This road is about ten feet above the high tide mark but two dozen homes use this road to access their homes. Power lines run along this road. How will esplanade homes like ours be affected by the setback changes? on Twitter Share Our waterfront home and about two dozen homes adjacent to use a gravel road to access our homes. This road is about ten feet above the high tide mark but two dozen homes use this road to access their homes. Power lines run along this road. How will esplanade homes like ours be affected by the setback changes? on Linkedin Email Our waterfront home and about two dozen homes adjacent to use a gravel road to access our homes. This road is about ten feet above the high tide mark but two dozen homes use this road to access their homes. Power lines run along this road. How will esplanade homes like ours be affected by the setback changes? link

    Our waterfront home and about two dozen homes adjacent to use a gravel road to access our homes. This road is about ten feet above the high tide mark but two dozen homes use this road to access their homes. Power lines run along this road. How will esplanade homes like ours be affected by the setback changes?

    DougR asked 5 months ago

    Hi, thanks for reaching out with your question. 

    The proposed amendments will not impact existing public roads (which in a regional district are owned and maintained by the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure).

  • Share Does SPEA also include ocean shorelines? Where does one find the specific changes for ocean front properties, above the high tide mark? What is the qualification requirement for the qualified person that is defining the high water tide line? on Facebook Share Does SPEA also include ocean shorelines? Where does one find the specific changes for ocean front properties, above the high tide mark? What is the qualification requirement for the qualified person that is defining the high water tide line? on Twitter Share Does SPEA also include ocean shorelines? Where does one find the specific changes for ocean front properties, above the high tide mark? What is the qualification requirement for the qualified person that is defining the high water tide line? on Linkedin Email Does SPEA also include ocean shorelines? Where does one find the specific changes for ocean front properties, above the high tide mark? What is the qualification requirement for the qualified person that is defining the high water tide line? link

    Does SPEA also include ocean shorelines? Where does one find the specific changes for ocean front properties, above the high tide mark? What is the qualification requirement for the qualified person that is defining the high water tide line?

    dsanford asked 5 months ago

    Hi, thank you for your questions. 

    Freshwater bodies, such as creeks, lakes, rivers and wetlands have “Streamside Protection and Enhancement Areas” (SPEAs) per the provincial government’s Riparian Areas Protection Regulation (RAPR). SPEAs are a area protected from building and land alteration along freshwater.

    Oceans are not subject to RAPR, and therefore do not have SPEAs.

    The only proposed zoning amendment related to the ocean is changing the setback for buildings and structures from 7.5m to 15m in Zoning Bylaw 337 (Pender Harbour zoning bylaw). The zoning setback in zoning bylaw 722 (bylaw for West Howe Sound, Elphinstone, Roberts Creek, and Halfmoon Bay) already has a 15m ocean setback.

    BC Land Surveyors (BCLS) are relied on to define/ locate the natural boundaries of the ocean. 

    Here are some helpful links:

  • Share I have a deep ravine at the edge of my property which is just over half an acre and zoned for two houses. There is currently only one small house but I purchased this property with the intention of building a second house in five years or so. How will these proposed changes affect me? Is there a way to find out how these changes directly affect me and other individual property owners? on Facebook Share I have a deep ravine at the edge of my property which is just over half an acre and zoned for two houses. There is currently only one small house but I purchased this property with the intention of building a second house in five years or so. How will these proposed changes affect me? Is there a way to find out how these changes directly affect me and other individual property owners? on Twitter Share I have a deep ravine at the edge of my property which is just over half an acre and zoned for two houses. There is currently only one small house but I purchased this property with the intention of building a second house in five years or so. How will these proposed changes affect me? Is there a way to find out how these changes directly affect me and other individual property owners? on Linkedin Email I have a deep ravine at the edge of my property which is just over half an acre and zoned for two houses. There is currently only one small house but I purchased this property with the intention of building a second house in five years or so. How will these proposed changes affect me? Is there a way to find out how these changes directly affect me and other individual property owners? link

    I have a deep ravine at the edge of my property which is just over half an acre and zoned for two houses. There is currently only one small house but I purchased this property with the intention of building a second house in five years or so. How will these proposed changes affect me? Is there a way to find out how these changes directly affect me and other individual property owners?

    Nat asked 5 months ago

    If you have property specific question reading a future development project, please reach out to the SCRD Development Planners with information on your property (address, description and proposed siting of your development project, etc.) to schedule a pre-application meeting. At this meeting, staff can outline if you require a Development Permit based on your preliminary development plan as well as confirm what is possible under your property’s zoning. 

    For more information on how to schedule a pre-application meeting, please visit this webpage: https://www.scrd.ca/planning.