Vancouver City Council |
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: June 17, 2003
Author/Local: A. Woo/7053RTS NO. 03475
CC File No. 113/1758
Meeting Date: July 8, 2003
TO:
Vancouver City Council
FROM:
Chief Building Official
SUBJECT:
Fee Increase for Equivalencies Review
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council approve an amendment to the fee schedule to the Building By-law for Equivalency Review Fees in accordance with Schedule A.
B. THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to prepare the necessary By-law to implement the revised fee schedule.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of A and B.
COUNCIL POLICY
It is Council policy that fees and charges be established on the basis of the cost of providing the associated services or at market level where the services are provided in a market environment.
Purpose
This report seeks Council approval to raise the fees to review Equivalencies in accordance with Schedule A.
Discussion
In the CSG budget presentation on March 12, 2003, initiatives were proposed to review our services and assess where fee adjustments might be required to adequately recover our costs. In reviewing the portfolios, staff suggests to raise the fee for equivalencies submission and to charge a fee for applications that are sent to the Equivalency Review Panel.
Materials, appliances, systems, equipment, methods of design and construction procedures that are not specified in the Vancouver Building By-law are permitted to be used if it can be shown that these alternatives are suitable on the basis of past performance, tests or evaluations through an equivalency review.
Application procedures and a permit system have been set up to review these equivalencies. For more complex equivalencies or if the applicant appeals the equivalency decision, the City may seek expertise from an equivalency review panel comprised of at least three senior management staff, and a representative from each of the Architect Institute of B.C. (AIBC) and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC(APEGBC).
The current fee to review a single equivalency for new buildings is $339 and the fee is adjusted for multiple equivalencies for the same project. Staff members spend on average 1-3 hours to review each equivalency, this would amount to $339-$685 using the existing hourly fee schedule. We are proposing to increase the equivalency review fees to $500 for a single equivalency, plus a sliding scale for multiple equivalencies.
We also review alternate approaches in existing buildings under a similar procedure. Many existing buildings do not meet today's code, and the acceptance of existing conditions are considered as minor relaxations with mitigating features. We are proposing to keep these reviews at a more affordable cost of $300 for a single application to encourage owners to come forward to properly address the existing non-conforming situations.
We are currently not charging for an equivalency panel review. The panel usually consists of 3 staff plus one representative from each AIBC and APEGBC. The panel meeting typically lasts 2 hours. We are proposing to charge $1500 for the equivalency panel, with $250 disbursement to each of the AIBC and APEGBC representatives. The professional representatives are currently not compensated for their professional involvement, and staff propose that they should be modestly reimbursed for their time.
As it has proved impractical to administer costs based on an hourly charge, we are proposing a fixed fee for administrative convenience. The revised fee schedule is summarized in the following Schedule A:
Schedule A
current fee
proposed fee
(single application)proposed fee
(multiple applications)Equivalencies for new work
$339
$500
$ 1000 for 2
$ 1250 for 3 or moreAcceptance of Existing Conditions with Mitigating Features
$339
$300
$600 for 2
$750 for 3 or moreEquivalency Review Panel
none
$ 1500*
n/a
*$500 disbursed to each volunteer.
Last year, we reviewed approximately 220 equivalencies and 50 acceptance of existing conditions. Ten applications were sent to the Equivalency Review Panel. Based on last year's statistics, the proposed increases would generate an additional $21,000 for the remainder of 2003 (if the by-law change is enacted July 1), and $42,000 net increase for the year 2004.
CONCLUSION
With the adoption later in 2005 of an objective based building code, we may receive more equivalency applications. Equivalency review fees have typically not reflected actual staff time required to review the applications particularly for the more complex matters. This report recommends a fee schedule that will charge a more appropriate amount which more accurately reflects the cost of providing this service.
* * * * *