Can recreational vehicles designed for temporary use also serve as permanent homes? The Town of Pincher Creek has decided no — at least not under current land-use rules.

At its July 27 meeting, council voted 6-0 to defeat Land Use Bylaw Amendment 1639-25-C, which would have allowed RVs to be used as permanent homes in the town’s manufactured and mobile home parks through discretionary approvals. Coun. Sahra Nodge was absent.

Under current rules, RVs are a prohibited use in those parks and cannot legally serve as full-time residences. The bylaw process now ends and that prohibition stands.

The request

The change was requested by Ok Hee Kim, a mobile home park owner, who asked council to allow RV residential use under discretionary approval.

In her application, Kim said many people cannot afford traditional housing or the cost of relocating an older mobile home, and allowing RVs as dwellings could expand options in an area with limited affordable housing.

She also said it would formalize existing non-compliant RV occupancy.

The case for

At a July 27 public hearing, several residents backed the change, citing the region’s housing affordability pressures.

One woman said she moved to an RV after being priced out of rentals, and described her lot as clean, affordable and well maintained. Restricting RV living, she said, would harm vulnerable, low-income residents, particularly as affordability pressures grow and aging infrastructure limits other housing options.

Another resident shared personal experience and said RV living is an option for people struggling with rising housing costs.

A written submission supported letting council consider RV occupancy through discretionary approval and suggested conditions such as ownership rules, seasonal limits, parking and screening, to regulate it.

The case against

Senior planner Steve Harty recommended council defeat the amendment, and several residents who spoke against it echoed his concerns.

Harty said RVs are legally classified only for travel and recreation, are not recognized as permanent housing under provincial rules, and fail national building code standards for insulation and fire safety. Also, RVs are not generally designed for year-round living in Alberta’s climate.

Residents who opposed the amendment raised the same fire-safety concern, noting RVs are built to different standards than permanent homes.

Harty also flagged a gap in tenant protections, noting Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Act may not clearly cover RV rental arrangements.

Both the planner and a number of residents warned the change could set a precedent. Harty cautioned that approving RV use in one district could invite similar requests elsewhere and that adding it to the R2 land-use district would open the possibility across all five of the town’s manufactured and mobile home parks.

Residents echoed that a bylaw change could have wider effects, including RVs appearing in unexpected public spaces.

Some opponents also raised concerns about neighbourhood impacts, infrastructure, enforcement and pressures they associated with more transient populations.

The vote

The land-use amendment received first reading June 22 and the town mailed notices to 175 nearby property owners June 30, ahead of the July 27 public hearing.

After hearing all submissions, Mayor Wayne Oliver asked whether anyone had new points to raise. None were offered and council voted unanimously to defeat second reading.

With that, the bylaw process ends and RVs remain prohibited as permanent homes under the town’s current land-use bylaw.

Administration noted the decision is final and cannot be challenged.