Who Approves a Subdivision in BC, and What They Can Refuse It For

If you are paying extra for a North Shore lot because you believe it can be split in two, the person who decides is not the council, not the planner who answered the phone, and not your REALTOR®. It is one appointed individual called the approving officer, and the Land Title Act gives them twelve listed grounds to refuse your subdivision plan plus one open-ended ground: that approving the plan would be against the public interest.

There is no appeal to council. The only review the Act provides is an application to the Supreme Court of British Columbia, it has to be made within one month, and the right to make it belongs to the owner who applied, not to a buyer who paid a premium. That is the whole shape of the risk, and almost nothing written about North Shore subdivision says it plainly.

Everything below comes from the Acts, regulations and municipal bylaws themselves, each opened and read. Where I could not confirm something twice, I say so and leave the number out. Anything municipal can change, so treat the contact details as the most useful part of this page: call before you write an offer, not after.

Who the approving officer is, and who puts them there

Section 77 (1) of the Land Title Act says that for land within a municipality, “the municipal council must appoint a person as an approving officer”. It is a duty, not an option.

Section 77 (2) then limits who it can be. The appointee must be the municipal engineer, the chief planning officer, some other employee appointed by council, or — and this surprises people — “a person who is under contract with the municipality”. A municipal approving officer does not have to be a municipal employee.

The three North Shore municipalities handle this very differently, and only one of them publishes a job title.

Municipality	What is actually published	Where it says so
City of North Vancouver	No job title. The role is defined only as “the person who is appointed by Council under the Land Title Act”. Council appoints named individuals, sometimes more than one at a time, and the appointment lasts only until their employment with the City ends.	Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw, 2010, No. 8014, section 302; Delegation Bylaw, 2026, No. 9157; and the City’s own council appointment resolutions
District of North Vancouver	No job title published anywhere I could find. The bylaw says only “the person appointed by the Council of the District as the Approving Officer”.	Development Servicing Bylaw 8145, 2017
West Vancouver	The Approving Officer is the Director of Operations by default, or another officer or person council appoints by resolution.	Subdivision Control Bylaw No. 1504, 1955, section 5

Two things follow from that table. In the City, the designation attaches to a person rather than a chair, so the officer who signed a neighbour’s plan three years ago may no longer hold the role. In West Vancouver the default officer sits in operations, not planning, which tells you what that municipality weighs most: roads, drainage and servicing.

The twelve grounds for refusal, and the open one that matters more

Start with the open ground, because it is the one that decides hard cases. Section 85 (3) reads: “In considering an application for subdivision approval in respect of land, the approving officer may refuse to approve the subdivision plan if the approving officer considers that the deposit of the plan is against the public interest.”

Note the grammar. It is not whether the plan is against the public interest. It is whether the approving officer considers that it is. That phrasing repeats all through this Part of the Act.

Section 86 (1) then opens with the words “Without limiting section 85 (3)” and sets out the specific grounds. People describe them as eleven, because the subparagraphs run (i) to (xi). There are in fact twelve, because the Act prints an extra subparagraph (iii.1).

Ground	What the officer must consider, in plain words
(i)	The development would injuriously affect the established amenities of adjoining or reasonably adjacent properties
(ii)	The plan does not comply with the Act’s rules on access and the sufficiency of highway allowances, or with Cabinet’s subdivision-plan regulations
(iii)	The highways in the plan are not cleared, drained, constructed and surfaced to the officer’s satisfaction, and no acceptable security has been provided instead
(iii.1)	A highway on land adjoining, lying beyond or around the land being subdivided is, in the officer’s opinion, not sufficient
(iv)	The land has inadequate drainage installations
(v)	The land is subject, or could reasonably be expected to be subject, to flooding, erosion, land slip or avalanche
(vi)	The development would adversely affect the natural environment or the conservation of heritage property to an unacceptable level
(vii)	The cost to the government of providing public utilities or other works or services would be excessive
(viii)	The same cost to the municipality or regional district would be excessive
(ix)	The subdivision is unsuited to the configuration of the land or to the intended use, or makes future subdivision of this land or adjacent land impracticable
(x)	The development would unreasonably interfere with farming operations nearby because of inadequate buffering or separation
(xi)	The highways shown would unreasonably or unnecessarily increase access to land in the Agricultural Land Reserve

Ground (ix) is the one a subdivision-potential buyer should read twice. It lets the officer refuse a split that would make future subdivision of the same land, or of the land next door, impracticable. A two-lot plan can be refused because of what it does to lot three.

Section 87 adds non-conformity with the Local Government Act and with municipal, regional district and improvement district bylaws on subdivision and zoning. Note that it also says “may refuse”: even a clear bylaw breach does not compel a refusal under that section.

The list is not closed, and Cabinet has already added to it

This is the single most important thing on this page, and I have not seen it written anywhere else for buyers.

Section 86 (2) reads: “The Lieutenant Governor in Council may, by regulation, amend, add to, substitute or repeal any of the grounds for refusal set out in this section or in section 85 (3).”

Read that again. Cabinet can change the grounds for refusing a subdivision by regulation, without the Legislature, and the power expressly reaches the public-interest ground as well. Anyone pricing a lot on the basis that it “meets the section 86 tests” is reading a list that can be rewritten.

And Cabinet has used the power. The Application for Subdivision Approval Regulation, B.C. Reg. 8/89, deposited January 20, 1989, carries two grounds that appear nowhere in the Act:

• Section 1. Where the plan affects land adjacent to a controlled access highway, the officer may refuse — “in addition to the ground for refusal stated in section 85 (3)” — if the plan does not provide access to the subdivided land, its remainder and contiguous or dependent land by an adequate road allowance for a frontage road, service road or local street.
• Section 2. Where the land is subject to an implementation agreement under section 451 (2) of the Local Government Act, the officer may refuse, “in addition to the grounds for refusal stated in section 86 (1) (c)”, if the plan does not comply with that agreement.

The regulation names its own authority at the foot of the page: Land Title Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 250, sections 83 (3) and 86 (2). It was last amended March 30, 2022 by B.C. Reg. 76/2022, and the consolidation I read is current to November 3, 2026.

What approval can come attached to

An approval is not always a yes. Section 86 (1) (d) lets the officer impose conditions, but only through a specific gate, and the gate matters: the power arises “if the approving officer considers that the land is, or could reasonably be expected to be, subject to flooding, erosion, land slip or avalanche”. Where that applies, the officer may require either or both of:

• a report certified by a professional engineer or geoscientist experienced in geotechnical engineering “that the land may be used safely for the use intended”; and
• one or more covenants under section 219 of the Act against any of the parcels being created.

On the North Shore, with its slopes, creeks and ravines, that gate opens often. The second limb is the one that costs money quietly: a section 219 covenant runs with the land and can restrict where and whether you build. You can be granted the two lots you wanted and find the second one carries a no-build area.

Separately, section 86 (1) (a) lets the officer personally examine the subdivision, or have an examination and report made, “at the cost of the subdivider”.

Then there is security. Grounds (iii) and section 75 (1) (b) both let the officer refuse unless the highways are built to their satisfaction or “security is provided in an amount and in a form acceptable to the approving officer”. Both the amount and the form are the officer’s call, and the Act puts no cap on either. The municipalities fill that in:

Municipality	Security required for works and services	Bylaw
City of North Vancouver	“a security deposit in the amount of 130% of the estimated construction cost, as accepted by the City Engineer”, before the Approving Officer approves the plan. The owner does not set the estimate.	Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw, 2010, No. 8014, section 801
District of North Vancouver	A performance deposit “in a form and amount satisfactory to the Approving Officer or the Authorized Person”. If the developer fails to maintain the works, the District may do the work and “deduct the costs of same plus a 20% administration charge from the security deposit”.	Development Servicing Bylaw 8145, 2017
West Vancouver	Works must be finished before approval unless the owner signs an agreement with the District and provides a performance bond or other satisfactory security.	Subdivision Control Bylaw No. 1504, 1955, section 46

The land they can require, without compensation

This is the part buyers almost never price in. The approving officer can require a slice of the land you just bought, for nothing, as a condition of creating the lots.

Section 513 of the Local Government Act is headed “Requirement to provide land for new highway or widening existing highway in respect of subdivisions”. It lets an approving officer require the owner to “provide, without compensation, a portion of that land for highway use”, and caps it:

Purpose	How much land, without compensation	Source
A highway within the subdivision	Up to 20 metres in depth	Local Government Act, section 513 (2) (a)
Widening an existing local highway that borders or is within the subdivision	The lesser of 10 metres in depth, and the difference between the highway’s current width and 20 metres	Local Government Act, section 513 (2) (b)
Where terrain and soil conditions mean an 8 metre roadway cannot be supported, protected or drained within the 20 metre limit	More than the caps above, as the officer determines	Local Government Act, section 513 (3)
Sustainable design features and infrastructure for walking, cycling, public transit or other alternatives	Up to a further 5 metres in depth, on top of section 513	Local Government Act, section 513.1
Public open space for park and public uses, in West Vancouver	Not exceeding 5% of the land being subdivided, or instead a payment equal to 5% of the land’s actual value as shown by the last revised assessment roll	West Vancouver Subdivision Control Bylaw No. 1504, 1955, section 43

Section 513 (3) is worth a second look. If the ground will not hold an 8 metre roadway inside the 20 metre limit, the cap comes off. That is a slope-and-soil clause, and the North Shore is a slope-and-soil place.

The West Vancouver open-space clause is a ceiling, not a fixed take: “not exceeding 5%”. And read the alternative carefully. The money option is 5% of the land’s actual value as shown by the last revised assessment roll — the bylaw’s own words, not market value and not a figure you negotiate.

Section 107 of the Land Title Act finishes the job. Depositing a plan that shows part of the land as a highway, park or public square not designated as private operates “as an immediate and conclusive dedication by the owner to the public”, for the purpose indicated “from the words or markings on the plan”. Section 107 (3) then says an indefeasible title must not be registered for such land. The moment the plan deposits, that piece of what you bought stops being anybody’s property to own.

What is not a ground, and where those requirements actually live

Ask people what an approving officer can refuse for and “no sewer” and “no water” come up quickly. Neither is a ground in section 86.

I checked this directly rather than taking anyone’s word for it. Across the whole of Part 7, the words “sewage”, “sewer” and “septic” do not appear at all. “Water supply” appears once, in section 75 (2), and only inside an exception about reservoirs and ponds. The nearest things in section 86 are ground (iv), inadequate drainage installations, and grounds (vii) and (viii), which are about cost, not adequacy.

The servicing requirement is real; it simply lives somewhere else. Section 506 of the Local Government Act, “Works and services requirements”, lets a local government by bylaw require that “a water distribution system, a fire hydrant system, a sewage collection system, a sewage disposal system, a drainage collection system or a drainage disposal system be provided, located and constructed in accordance with the standards established in the bylaw”. The connector is section 87 of the Land Title Act, which lets the officer refuse a plan that does not conform to the Local Government Act and to local bylaws.

While you are in that neighbourhood of the Local Government Act, section 512 is worth knowing and is almost never quoted. If a parcel created by a subdivision fronts on a highway, the minimum frontage must be the greater of 10% of the perimeter of the lot that fronts the highway, and whatever minimum the local government sets by bylaw. A local government may exempt a parcel from either.

The relief section that reads generously and delivers much less

If the problem with your lot is access, the Act appears to offer a way out. Section 76 (1) says that “in circumstances prescribed under subsection (2), an approving officer may grant relief from compliance with all or part of the provisions of section 75 (1) (a) or (b)”.

Section 75 (1) (a) is the requirement for a sufficient highway providing necessary and reasonable access. Section 75 (1) (b) is the harder one: that surrounding highways be continued without unnecessary jogs and be “cleared, drained, constructed and surfaced to the approving officer’s satisfaction”. So the Act contemplates relief from both.

Then go and read the regulation, which is where the section actually gets its content. The Land Title Act Regulation, B.C. Reg. 334/79, prescribes relief from section 75 (1) (a) only. I searched the entire regulation: the string “75 (1) (b)” does not occur in it once. There is no prescribed circumstance for relief from the highway-construction requirement at all.

Even the access relief is narrow. Section 8 of the regulation requires that the subdivision be “consistent with good land-use planning” and “not contrary to the public interest”, and that it fall into one of four situations: land outside an established system of highways; land with access only by air or water; land whose only connection to the provincial highway system is “by tram line, cable car, gondola lift or a forest service road established under the Forest Act”; or a plan tendered by or at the request of the Crown.

Those gateways are written for remote and Crown land. An ordinary North Shore lot whose problem is an awkward frontage fits none of them. And the verb is still “may grant”, so clearing every hurdle earns no entitlement.

The “subdivide for a relative” section, and why it will not help you here

Section 514 of the Local Government Act is the closest thing in BC law to a subdivision loophole, and it is worth explaining precisely because it gets repeated as one when it is not.

It lets an approving officer approve a subdivision that a minimum-parcel-size bylaw would otherwise prevent. The conditions in section 514 (2) are specific: the applicant must have owned the parcel for at least 5 years before applying, and the application must be for the purpose of providing a separate residence for the owner, a parent of the owner or of the owner’s spouse, the owner’s child or the spouse of that child, or the owner’s grandchild.

Now the part nobody mentions. Section 514 (6) says any parcel created under that section that any parcel created under that section must be at least 1 hectare, and in no case smaller than 2,500 square metres even where a bylaw allows a reduction. One hectare is ten thousand square metres. A typical North Shore residential lot is a small fraction of that.

So section 514 is a rural and large-parcel tool. On an ordinary City, District or West Vancouver lot it is arithmetically unavailable, no matter how genuine the family reason. If someone tells you a family subdivision gets around the lot-size rules on the North Shore, that is the subsection to show them.

The two clocks, and how they can move

Both clocks run against the applicant, and both can be missed.

Stage	The time limit	What can change it
Deciding the application	Approve or reject within 2 months of the plan being tendered for examination and approval	Land Title Act, section 85 (1). The regulation measures the 2 months from “the later of” the tender date and the date a profile or sketch is filed after a request under section 83 (2) (c) or (d)
Deciding the application, in certain areas or on certain conditions	3 months instead of 2	B.C. Reg. 334/79, section 27 (2): the Cowichan, Barclay, Clayoquot, Nootka or Rupert Land Districts, or Coast Ranges 1, 2 or 3 — or whenever the officer imposes a condition of consent under section 86 (1) (d)
Turning an approval into a registered plan	Tender the plan for deposit to the registrar within 2 months of approval	Land Title Act, section 92 (1) (c). A further time may be allowed by the registrar, not the approving officer, for “sufficient cause”, and only on an application made before the 2 months expire
Missing that deadline	“the approval of the plan is deemed to have been revoked”	Land Title Act, section 92 (2). There is no cure in the section

Two practical points. The second clock sits with the Land Title Office, so the extension has to be asked for in the right place, early. And because the geotechnical and covenant conditions under section 86 (1) (d) are exactly the ones a steep North Shore lot attracts, the North Shore version of this is often the 3 month version.

If it is refused, what you are actually owed

Less than most people expect. Section 85 (2) requires the officer, on rejecting the plan, to “forthwith notify in writing the applicant, or the solicitor or agent of the applicant, of the rejection, stating briefly the reason and the approving officer’s requirements, if any”.

In writing, and promptly. But the standard is “briefly”, and “the reason” is singular. Do not expect a reasoned decision letter you can pick apart.

From there, section 89 gives the only review the Act provides, and every limb of it is tight:

• It is “the subdivider” who may apply — the owner who applied. A buyer who paid a premium for subdivision potential is not given a route of their own.
• It goes to the Supreme Court, as “an application in the nature of an appeal”.
• The deadline is within one month of receiving the rejection, or within one month of the section 85 time limit expiring if the officer simply never decided.
• The court may extend that by “a period not exceeding one month”, and only on an application made inside the original month.
• The court may make any order the circumstances require, “including a direction that the approving officer approve the plan, if otherwise in order”.

What there is no route to at all is council. I looked through Part 7 for any power in a council, board or elected body to review, overturn, direct or reconsider a subdivision decision, and there is none. Council appoints the officer, and section 87 makes council’s bylaws something the officer must consider — so the elected influence is exercised in advance, through bylaws, not afterwards by appeal. “We will take it to council” is not a plan.

One honest gap. How hard a section 89 appeal is to win is a question about decided cases, and the published BC judgments on it are not reachable from any source I can open and verify. I am not going to quote judicial reasoning I have not read, or print a citation I cannot check. What I can tell you is what the Act says, which is that the discretion is given to the officer personally, in language about what the officer “considers”, is “of the opinion” and finds “to the approving officer’s satisfaction”. If this decision is worth real money to you, that is a question for a BC lawyer who can read the case law, not for an article.

What it costs and how long it takes on the North Shore

Only one of the three municipalities publishes an end-to-end estimate, and it is the most useful paragraph any of them has written. The District of North Vancouver’s subdivision application process document says a simple two-lot subdivision “generally take approximately 6 months from preliminary application to final approval”, and that “a simple application to subdivide 1 property into 2 lots may incur total costs in the range of $60,000 – $70,000”.

Carry the caveats with the number, because the District does. That range is “exclusive of consulting fees and note that applicable security deposits may be refunded”, the document warns that “any unusual site conditions can alter these costs significantly” and that “All fees are subject to change”, and it also says more complex subdivisions “can take from 6 months up to one year (or more)”. It is dated “Revised: March 2, 2017”. Its own itemised fees are now superseded by the current fees bylaw, so treat the range as the District’s order of magnitude, not as today’s invoice.

The application fees themselves are set by bylaw, so these are checkable:

Charge	City of North Vancouver	District of North Vancouver	West Vancouver
Preliminary stage	Preliminary Application to Subdivide (fee set within Schedule D)	Preliminary Planning Application, no more than 2 additional lots: $1,080.00	Preliminary Layout Extension, without changes to the plan: $150.00
Creating new lots, base fee	$1,041.41 per application	$2,690.00	$5,000.00 for a total of three or fewer lots; $7,500.00 plus $1,000.00 per lot created above that
Per lot	$104.14 for the first lot created, then $52.07 for each additional lot	$660.00 per new lot created	Included above
Lot-line adjustment	$624.84 per application	$1,465.00	Not published separately
Final plan examination	$520.70 for each request	Signing fee applies	$1,000.00 for three or fewer lots; $1,500.00 plus $25.00 per lot above that
Extending a conditional approval	$260.35 for each extension granted	Conditions Letter extension: $705.00	$150.00
Resubmitting	Construction process administration fees apply	$705.00 per resubmission	Plan resigning: $150.00
Subdividing difficult terrain	Not a separate fee	Not a separate fee	Under OCP designation NE6: $6,765.00 considered by the Director of Planning, Development & Environment Services, or $10,150.00 considered by Council

West Vancouver’s NE6 line is the plainest signal in any of the three bylaws that difficult land costs more to split. It is a published fee with a bylaw behind it, and it exists because steep ground takes more work to assess.

Then come the charges that are triggered by the new lot existing, not by the application. Development cost charges are payable, in the City’s words, “at the time of approval of the subdivision or the issuance of the building permit” — so creating the lot is itself the trigger.

Charge	Amount	Authority and effective date
City of North Vancouver development cost charges, per single-family dwelling unit	$17,747	Development Cost Charges Bylaw, 2016, No. 8471, Schedule A, consolidated to November 3, 2025
Greater Vancouver Sewer and Drainage District, single family residential use, per dwelling unit	$10,478	Amending Bylaw 371, 2023, effective January 1, 2026
Greater Vancouver Water District, per residential lot development unit	$16,926	Bylaw 257, 2022, amending Bylaw 260, 2023, effective January 1, 2026
Metro Vancouver Regional District parkland acquisition, per residential lot development unit	$981	Bylaw 1369, 2023, effective January 1, 2026
TransLink, single family dwelling, per dwelling unit	$3,416	Bylaw 155, 2024, effective January 1, 2025
District of North Vancouver development cost and amenity charges	Not printed here	See the note below

Here is what I could not confirm, and I would rather say so than fill the cell. The District of North Vancouver’s per-lot development cost and amenity charges appear in a June 2024 information-session presentation under the heading “Total Proposed DCC + ACC”, with first reading recorded for July 2024 and an adoption target later that year. A proposal is not a charge, the presentation gives no bylaw numbers, and I could not find an adopted District rate schedule. So the number is not on this page. If you are costing a District subdivision, that is a phone call to make, not a figure to assume, and it is likely to be the largest single item.

What the new housing rules did and did not change

“The province changed the rules, so you can subdivide now” is the single most common thing said to me about this, and on the North Shore it is wrong in three different ways.

First, the subdivision Part of the Land Title Act was not touched. I checked the Act’s own Tables of Legislative Changes: sections 75, 76, 80, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 92 and 107 have no amendment entry at all through the period covered. The small-scale multi-unit housing legislation amended the Local Government Act, the Vancouver Charter and the Islands Trust Act. What did change nearby is the Local Government Act machinery that Part 7 leans on: section 506 was repealed and substituted, and section 513 amended, by the Housing Statutes Amendment Act, 2024, effective April 25, 2024. More units on a lot, not easier lots.

Second, the three municipalities are in three different places, and West Vancouver’s position is still moving. On November 27, 2025 the Province passed Bill 25, the Housing and Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, which on West Vancouver’s own account “requires the District to enable multi-unit housing (typically either four or six units per lot) in zones that have historically been restricted to single family dwellings, secondary suites, and coach houses”, with a compliance deadline of June 30, 2026. When I read that page today, West Vancouver had given first, second and third readings to Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 5446, 2026, referred it to the Ministry of Transportation and Transit for the approval the legislation requires, and stated in terms: “The bylaw has therefore not yet been adopted.” The City of North Vancouver has already replaced its single-detached and duplex zones with a Ground Oriented zone, and its published amendment sets minimum lot widths for subdivision in that zone, from 7.5 metres in the Low Rise Neighbourhood 1 designation. Confirm the position for your own property with the municipality before you rely on any of it, because this is changing month to month.

And here is the detail that matters most for this article: the word “subdivision” does not appear on West Vancouver’s small-scale housing page at all. I searched the page text for it and there are no occurrences. Permission for more units on a lot is not permission for more lots.

Third, and this is the one that saves people money: the reforms generally make it easier to put more homes on one lot than to turn one lot into two. Subdividing means an approving officer, servicing, security, dedications and development cost charges per lot. Building additional units on the lot you already own often means none of the first four. If the goal is two homes, ask which route actually gets you there before you pay a premium for the one with the word “subdividable” attached.

Before you pay a premium for subdivision potential

• Ask the municipality first, in writing, and early. A preliminary application exists in all three municipalities precisely so that you find out before you spend. It is the cheapest thing in this article.
• Get the zone, not the impression. The zone decides whether a split is even arithmetically possible. West Vancouver’s single-family zones alone run from very large minimum site areas down to small ones, so two neighbouring streets can give completely different answers.
• Price the dedication. Work out what 20 metres of depth, or 5 more metres, would take off the lot you are looking at, and whether what is left still works.
• Assume a geotechnical report on a slope. On this terrain, ground (v) and the section 86 (1) (d) gate are live, and the report is at your cost.
• Read the covenant risk. Ask what section 219 covenants the municipality normally requires on new lots in that area, because a covenant can take away the buildable part of the lot you just created.
• Do not plan on an appeal. One month, to the Supreme Court, and the right belongs to the applicant.
• Make the contract do the work. If the price depends on the split happening, that belongs in the contract as a condition, with a timeline that matches the real one, not in your hopes. Ask your lawyer or notary how to write it.

Who to call. For the District of North Vancouver, Development Planning is 604-990-2480 or planning@dnv.org, and the main District line is 604-990-2311, at District Hall, 355 West Queens Road. For the City of North Vancouver, the main line is 604-985-7761, at 141 West 14th Street. For West Vancouver, the published planning email is planning@westvancouver.ca, at Municipal Hall, 750 17th Street. West Vancouver’s planning department line is 604-925-7040, which appears on both its small-scale housing page and its information-for-subdividers guide; if the subdivision desk is elsewhere, the municipal hall switchboard will route you.

Questions people ask

Can the council overrule the approving officer?

No. Nothing in Part 7 of the Land Title Act gives a council, board or elected body power to review or overturn a subdivision decision. Council appoints the officer and sets the bylaws the officer must consider. The only review in the Act is to the Supreme Court under section 89.

How long does the approving officer have to decide?

2 months from the plan being tendered, under section 85 (1), measured from the later of that date and the date any profile or sketch is filed after a request. It becomes 3 months whenever the officer imposes a condition of consent under section 86 (1) (d), which on a steep or creek-side lot is common.

Does an approval expire?

Yes. Under section 92, the plan must be tendered for deposit to the registrar within 2 months of approval. A further time may be allowed by the registrar for sufficient cause, but only if asked for before the 2 months run out. Otherwise “the approval of the plan is deemed to have been revoked”.

Can I subdivide below the minimum lot size to build a home for my parents?

Section 514 of the Local Government Act does allow an approving officer to approve a subdivision a minimum-size bylaw would prevent, for a separate residence for the owner, a parent, a child, a child’s spouse or a grandchild, after 5 years of ownership. But section 514 (6) requires the new parcel to be at least 1 hectare, and never smaller than 2,500 square metres. On an ordinary North Shore lot the arithmetic rules it out.

Who pays for the geotechnical report and the examination?

The subdivider. Section 86 (1) (a) lets the officer have an examination and report made “at the cost of the subdivider”, and the certified geotechnical report under section 86 (1) (d) (i) is the applicant’s to provide.

If a seller says the lot is subdividable, what should I ask for?

Ask for the paper. Any preliminary application, conditions letter, preliminary layout, engineer’s report or municipal correspondence about this specific property, with its date. If none exists, what you have been told is an opinion about zoning, not a decision about your lot, and the two are not the same thing.

Where these numbers come from

• Land Title Act, Part 7, King’s Printer, current to November 3, 2026. Checked 7 November 2026.
• Land Title Act Regulation, B.C. Reg. 334/79, current to November 3, 2026. Checked 7 November 2026.
• Application for Subdivision Approval Regulation, B.C. Reg. 8/89, current to November 3, 2026. Checked 7 November 2026.
• Local Government Act, Part 14, current to November 3, 2026, for sections 506, 512, 513, 513.1 and 514. Checked 7 November 2026.
• District of North Vancouver, Subdivision Application Process, revised March 2, 2017. Checked 7 November 2026.
• District of North Vancouver Fees and Charges Bylaw 6481, as amended to Bylaw 8777. Checked 7 November 2026.
• District of North Vancouver Development Servicing Bylaw 8145, 2017. Checked 7 November 2026.
• City of North Vancouver Fees and Charges Bylaw, 2024, No. 9000, consolidated to December 8, 2025. Checked 7 November 2026.
• City of North Vancouver Development Cost Charges Bylaw, 2016, No. 8471, consolidated to November 3, 2025. Checked 7 November 2026.
• City of North Vancouver Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw, 2010, No. 8014. Checked 7 November 2026.
• West Vancouver Fees and Charges Bylaw No. 5383, 2025. Checked 7 November 2026.
• Regional development cost charge summary, updated February 2026, for the four regional charges. Checked 7 November 2026.

Read next

• How many homes you can put on a North Vancouver lot — the other half of this question, and usually the cheaper half.
• A covenant on title in BC: what it stops you doing — what a section 219 covenant actually does to a lot.
• A building scheme on title — the private restriction that survives every zoning change.
• What to check before buying an older North Shore home.
• How to check a North Vancouver building permit history.
• All of the guides are collected at tomjahed.ca/guides.
• فارسی: چه کسی دربارهٔ تفکیک زمین تصمیم می‌گیرد

This is general information about British Columbia law and North Shore municipal practice, not advice on a specific property, and not legal advice. Every figure above was read at its own primary source and checked a second time on 7 November 2026, and the statute and regulation consolidations I relied on print “current to November 3, 2026”. Fees, bylaws, zoning and provincial rules change, and a municipal document can be superseded without notice, so confirm anything that matters with the authority that owns it before you act. Where a figure could not be verified twice it has been left out and the gap is named in the text. Take professional advice on your own situation. Last reviewed November 2026.

Written by Tom Jahed, licensed REALTOR®, Vanak Realty, North Vancouver.