At present, there is no consistent approach to the calculation of height across the Electoral Area Zoning Bylaws. 

This is seen to create significant challenges for staff when interpreting and applying the bylaws (i.e. advising the public, completing zone checks of building permit applications, etc.) and for the public when attempting to understand and comply with the bylaws (i.e. undertaking projects in different Electoral Areas).

In response, the Regional District is proposing to introduce a standard definition of “height” to the Electoral Area Zoning Bylaws in which finished grade forms the base of measurement:

“height” means the vertical distance from the average finished grade to the highest point of the roof or structure;

This change will require ancillary amendments to the maximum building height permitted in the Electoral Area “F” Zoning Bylaw to reflect the new definition (which has a cascading effect on setbacks for accessory structures in the Small Holdings Five Zone – see annotated version of the draft amendment bylaw below). 

In addition to the aforementioned amendments to related to retaining wall and building height, the Regional District is also proposing a number of minor amendments to address consistency issues with the Electoral Area Zoning Bylaws.

This includes a basic re-ordering of the bylaw sections related to “Administration”, “Basic Provisions”, “Creation of Zones” and “Subdivision Regulations” in order to improve and clarify the intent of these sections.

The Regional District is also proposing that existing exemptions to the calculation of “height” currently found in some definitions of “height” but missing entirely in other bylaws be moved to Section 7.7 (Projections). 

In amending Section 7.7, Administration also favours clarifying that the ability to project into a prescribed setback also applies to “uncovered decks” (in addition to stairwells, balconies, porches and canopies).