CITY OF VANCOUVER

ADMINSITRATIVE REPORT

 

 

Date:

January 20, 2005

 

Author:

Chris Warren

 

Phone No.:

604-871-6033

 

RTS No.:

04804

 

CC File No.:

1360

 

Meeting Date:

February 3, 2005

TO:

Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets

FROM:

Director of Development Services, in consultation with the Director of Current Planning, the General Manager of Engineering Services, the Director of Legal Services, General Manager of Corporate Services and the Director, Real Estate Services.

SUBJECT:

Permit Processing - Resources Required

RECOMMENDATIONS

AND FURTHER THAT

The regular full time positions be established as follows:

In 2005:

Development Services - 6 positions without offset

3 Development Assistants $164,100
1 Project Facilitator I $ 73,100
1 Customer Service Specialist $ 70,000
1 Enquiry Centre Officer $ 64,500

Engineering Services - 4 positions consisting of conversion of 2 existing temporary positions with funding offset from Engineering Services Temp Help budget for $119,200 and 2 new positions without offset

1 Engineering Assistant III $54,700 without offset
1 Engineering Assistant III $54,700 funded - Temp Help
1 Engineering Assistant IV $64,500 funded - Temp Help
1 Assistant City Surveyor (exempt) $85,800 without offset

Planning Department - 1 position without offset

1 Development Planner III $90,200

Legal Services - 1.5 positions without offset

1 Solicitor III $116,200
0.5 Legal Assistant I $ 25,200

Corporate Services, Real Estate - 1 position with 0.5 offset from the Property

Endowment Fund

1 Property Negotiator II $73,100 0.5 offset from PEF

C. THAT Council receive for INFORMATION the establishment of 4 additional full time positions in Development Services, beginning in 2006 and subject to a report back in November 2005, to include results of service improvements related to the additional staff, at an annual estimated cost of $291,400, subject to review and classification by Human Resources, plus one time staffing costs of $20,000 for computers, furniture, equipment, and supplies as follows:

In 2006:

Development Services - 4 positions without offset

1 Project Facilitator III $ 92,200
1 Customer Service Representative $ 55,900
2 Customer Service Specialists $143,300

D. THAT Council receive for INFORMATION the related request for one-time space costs for moving and renovations estimated at $175,000 and that approval and funding be deferred to the 2005 Interim Operating Budget.

E. THAT Council receive for INFORMATION the related request for ongoing lease space costs estimated at $105,000 (pro-rated for 2005 at $52,500) and that approval and funding be deferred to the 2005 Interim Operating Budget.

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The General Manager supports RECOMMENDATIONS A, B, D and E and notes that the request for Development Services staff is phased in order to meet the most immediate workload needs and gaps in service. The additional resources in RECOMMENDATION C will be recommended to Council in November 2005, when staff report back on the progress in meeting service improvement targets.

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

An integrated structure and process for regulatory review is required if we are to effectively streamline permit processing. This report outlines corporate requirements to respond to the increasing demand on permit processing services. For many years, the City has used the regulatory system to enshrine urban design, neighbourliness, sustainable, safe and effective construction, consultation and many other principles, to create the built environment we have today. However, the combination of the increased number of regulations and applications has posed significant service gaps in spite of some successful efforts to streamline and reduce processing times and improve services. Two necessary steps are recommended in this report: an initiative to review our regulations and the approval of resources targeted to identified gaps in our permit processing services.

COUNCIL POLICY

All changes in level of service are to be reported to Council.

SUMMARY

For some time, departments engaged in permit processing have been experiencing a widening and disturbing gap between customer needs and the capacity to meet those needs. Pressure emanates from a range of challenges including: ever increasing regulations and commensurate complexity, project complexity resulting from developers' interest in increasing density, application volumes, neighbourhood demand for greater levels of involvement, staff turnover and training needs, issues regarding the knowledge and competence of applicants and the lack of an appropriate technology system to support permitting activity. The goals of these departments are to improve service to customers by:

To meet these goals, staff are recommending an increase in resources in five departments. The request for 2005 is for 13.5 positions: 6 in Development Services, 4 in Engineering Services, 1 in Planning, 1.5 in Legal Services and 1 in Real Estate Services. Eleven (11) of these positions require new funding. An additional 4 positions in Development Services are recommended to begin in 2006, after a report back in November 2005. The report-back will provide information on the success of the targeted improvements to that point. The total annual increase for the staffing requested for 2005 is $780,355. Associated one-time costs for workstation set-up and space are estimated at $70,000. Related one-time costs for moving and renovations are estimated at $175,000. Ongoing lease space costs are estimated to be $105,000. The total annual increase for staffing requested for 2006 is estimated at $291,437. with one-time costs for workstation set-up being $20,000. The total number of positions requested for 2005/2006 is 17.5, with funding offsets for 2.5 positions.

While revenues from permit activity have increased by 49% since 2000, the staff complement directly involved in permit processing has only increased by 1 time-limited position. Based on historical actual revenue increases since 2000, it is anticipated that increased revenues will easily cover additional staff costs.

Staff are also recommending to Council a report back in May 2005, on the necessary structures and processes to address the need to decrease and synchronize regulations and to augment our current assessment of proposed new regulations in light of staff ability to administer them. Without this work, and if there continues to be increase in regulations, staff's ability to maintain anticipated service improvements will remain challenged.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to outline for Council the staff resources required to more closely meet the permit processing times and service expectations of the City's customers. The report also describes the challenges inherent in the process. Staff resources requested are identified for the Development Services Department, Legal Services, Engineering Services, the Planning Department and Real Estate Services.

BACKGROUND

The Development Services Department was formed in 2000 as a result of the Development and Building Review (DBR) undertaken as part of the Better City Government initiative. The conclusions of the review pertained to streamlining and integrating the application review process and improving service. To facilitate the integration, with only a few exceptions, staff in the Planning and the previous Permits and Licenses Department who had permit processing functions were moved to the new Development Services Department.

As a first step, the then-Council approved a number of positions in Development Services and two in the Planning Department, to address some, but nowhere near all, of the recommendations of the DBR.

Working with the many other departments involved in permit processing, the goal of Development Services has always been to provide applicants with a timely, thorough, responsive, and accurate application review, at the same time as attending to the concerns of the other customers served through the process - the public at large and residents who participate in the review process. As volume, project complexity, the number of corporate priorities, the number of regulations, and the expectations and involvement of all our customers has risen, so too has management and staff dismay at not always being able to meet those expectations.

Staff have implemented numerous process improvements over the last few years and these have produced positive results in some areas. However, the gap between customer needs and our ability to deliver is growing. And when, as in 2004, there is a significant peak in development and building activity, processing times increase even further and our capacity to provide good service diminishes. As an illustration, customer wait times in the Enquiry Centre reached unprecedented levels in the spring and summer of 2004, with people sometimes waiting for up to 2 ½ hours. Processing times for most development permit applications rose in the summer by about 5 weeks compared to 2003, and both building permit applications and applications for single-family dwellings rose by 1 week.

Staff have reached the conclusion that to maintain existing levels of service for current and future demand, and to improve processing times wherever possible, there is a need not only to continue trying to improve processes where possible, but additional staff is also required. Further, a review of regulations is also necessary.

The following discussion provides information on the permitting process, the departments involved, the historic and new challenges to expedient processing, and on the new positions being requested with associated costs.

DISCUSSION

OVERVIEW OF THE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS

The Development Services Department is the "hub" of permit processing for the City, handling all the development and building permit applications received. It also processes a significant number of other types of related permits, approvals for subdivision and strata applications and applications for special inspections. The over one hundred (100) staff in the department issue about 28,000 permits per year, respond to approximately 65,000 enquiries and send out close to 95,000 notification and renotification letters to the community.

Applications are becoming more complex: the increasing number of regulations, the densification of the city and neighbourhood involvement all contribute to this. As the complexity of an application increases, so does the involvement of other departments. A very complex application can trigger the involvement of up to twelve other departments or work groups. The Planning Department works with Development Services on a regular basis. Development Planners are part of the core processing team for development permits, and other Planning staff - notably in Heritage, Rezoning and Central Area Planning - often provide necessary input. Development Services' other most frequent partner is Engineering, which reviews and advises on almost all permits outside of those we deal with over the counter. Legal Services works with applicants and other departments' staff to provide legal advice and to develop legal agreements, the requirements for which grow substantially as complexity increases. Real Estate Services works with applicants, Planning and Development Services staff to provide advice and economic analyses for Heritage developments.

Depending on the type and complexity of the application, others involved include: Fire and Rescue Services, Social Planning, the Office of Cultural Affairs, the Office of the Chief Building Official, the Housing Centre, Licenses and Inspections, Parks, and Environmental Protection. A more detailed outline of permits processed and departmental roles is outlined in Appendix D.

CUSTOMERS OF THE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS

The Development Services Department and its partner departments have four major customers:

· people who desire information about regulations and processes;
· applicants and their clients (seeking permit approvals);
· neighbours, or the "participating" public (those residents and neighbours who deem themselves affected by a specific development); and
· the general public (through the application of the various by-laws we administer

Customer demand for excellent service includes the following - sometimes contradictory - elements:

· Faster application processing times
· More involvement from the participating public.
· Advice and information which is clear and consistent.
· Clear requirements and more certainty regarding the outcome.
· Fewer regulations and less complexity - from the applicants' perspective.
· More regulations (or perhaps less development) - from neighbours' perspective.

The challenge is to strike an appropriate balance among competing expectations, and at the same time, offering excellent service. The environment in which we do this is one of increasing demand, increased regulations and complexity, greater resident involvement and significant staff turnover and training requirements.

CHALLENGES FOR THE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS

The challenges to meeting customer expectations fall into the categories described below.
 
1. Regulatory Requirements, Complexity and Volume

Vancouver is at the forefront of urban innovation. In the past quarter century the City has engaged in an expanded scope of urban policy development, advancing novel approaches in the development of this city.

New policy is frequently translated into regulation and it is the administration of regulations which ultimately determines how well we achieve policy objectives. While the need for additional resources has occasionally been identified at the time of policy adoption, more commonly the regulatory framework has grown in small increments which have not individually warranted additional "whole" staff resources to sustain the additional work generated. A sampling of regulations developed over the last number of years includes:

· Development and expansion of discretionary zoning in residential neighbourhoods
· Balcony enclosures
· Residential storage space
· Community amenity bonusing
· Heritage revitalization
· Air space subdivisions
· Strata title conversion
· Mandatory sprinklers
· Building envelope
· Artists studios
· Public art
· Crime Prevention through Environmental Design
· Revised regulations for C2 zones
· High Building Policy
· Permeability
· Accessibility
· Single Room Occupancy
· Public Realm/streetscape standards
· Bicycle Parking

Each one of these - and there are many more - requires staff attention, time-consuming calculations and inter-departmental review and discussion. New and innovative policy development is critical to the future livability, safety and sustainability of our urban environment. However, we simply cannot sustain effective implementation of an expanding and more complex regulatory framework - let alone achieve more timeliness in service delivery - without additional resources for permit processing activities in the involved departments.

At the same time, with rising land and construction costs, developers have more frequently chosen to take advantage of the opportunities which permit increased density on individual development sites. These opportunities provide for density bonuses for public objectives such as heritage, social and cultural facilities, affordable housing and high quality design. Each proposal, however, - sometimes involving a combination of initiatives - expands the complexity of policies and regulations against which it must be tested, including the need for related legal agreements. A count of 47 "major" projects in 2004, revealed that the City required 167 legal agreements for these projects. (This does not include the estimated 70 legal agreements which will be required for the Trade and Convention Centre.)

Our regulations have grown over the years for a variety of reasons, including as a response to public demands. However, there is a prevalent concern among permit processing staff and applicants that existing regulations require review and that complexity will only continue to grow with additional regulations. While regulations, and the policies which required them, contribute greatly to the beauty and safety of Vancouver and to the implementation of important public benefits, at this point there must be a concerted effort made to address the issue. Without this effort, staff capacity to maintain the service improvements identified in this report will be diminished. It is important to note as well, that the Development and Building Review (DBR) began as an initiative to not only address process-related issues, but also regulatory issues. The regulatory component of the review was dropped at the time because of the impossibility of undertaking both reviews concurrently. Development Services and Planning staff have been working on this, however, attempts at reducing and synchronizing regulations have been hampered by the lack of capacity to undertake such a complex and time-consuming task.

The situation is only likely to worsen without dedicated effort being made. Consequently, staff are recommending to Council that to begin this effort a consultant be hired as soon as possible to work with senior management and industry representatives to:

Staff will report back to Council on the recommended structures and processes by May of 2005.

Volume

Coupled with the issue of increased regulations and complexity, is the volume of applications with which we are dealing. Since the inception of Development Services, volumes have been consistently greater than we can effectively administer, with a backlog of Development Permits, for example, of approximately 300 at any point in time. Other departments deal with similar numbers, with individual permit processing staff handling up to fifty projects.

For twenty (20) general permit types, representing 400 fee categories, the cumulative four year growth rate in the volume of application intake (2000 - 2004) was 26.25%, with an average annual growth rate of 6.56%. Permit issuances have risen similarly, with a cumulative growth rate of 27.23% and an annual average rate of 6.81%. Notifications to residents have risen by 101% over the past four years.
 
2. More Involvement from the Participating Public

In direct contradiction to the desire on the part of applicants for shorter processing times, there is a demand from the public to have more notification of projects, more time for notification and a heightened expectation that their involvement will result in more responsiveness to their concerns. This responsiveness often takes the form of more conditions to be satisfied by the development permit applicant prior to permit issuance.

The increased involvement and sophistication of residents can be seen in the number of projects which become controversial, the quality of resident input and the fact that third party appeals to the Board of Variance have increased by 800% over the past five (5) years.
Working with a number of other departments, Development Services has recently completed protocols for the more coordinated and effective processing of social service and non-market housing projects, as these can be contentious and time-consuming. However, many other projects, particularly high rise developments in the downtown core, can also be controversial and can require significant staff time for public process. Staff have found that, while it was historically typical to ask the applicants to conduct public participation, they are not always sufficiently well versed in public process to satisfy the expectations of either the public or the City. More and more, there is an expectation that our staff will take the lead in these processes and further, that they will continue being involved in dispute resolution even after permit issuance.

3. Staff Turnover, Training and Performance

In Development Services particularly, staff turnover is high. The work in the department is demanding in terms of skill and knowledge, is time-sensitive and our customers generally come to us because they have to, not because they want to.

The ramifications of staff turnover are exacerbated by the steep and extensive learning curve for new staff. Managers estimate that it takes at least two years for a new staff person to acquire the necessary knowledge to feel comfortable in any technical position. This is true across all departments. Given the workload, training is almost a luxury in Development Services, with the managers/supervisors taking on this function on a "when they can" basis. And, historically, good documentation was lacking, so there is little written information for staff to use regarding decisions and interpretations.

Partly as result of the training and documentation issues, consistency of information and by-law interpretation can be an issue in Development Services. This results in significant management involvement in application review and complaint response. Because of concerns regarding accuracy and consistency, the department has taken steps to provide the processes necessary to assist staff, such as managers undertaking "early reviews" of applications; however the availability of the managers to work with staff does not equal the expressed need for their time.

In reality, process improvements, staff management, training and documentation often lose out to the full-time, daily work of assisting staff and applicants in permit processing, the "nuts and bolts" of Development Services work.

4. Knowledge and Competency of Applicants

The City system poses real challenges for novice applicants who don't understand the daunting by-law and process requirements. In particular, people wanting to open new businesses who have had no prior need to deal with our system, come to us with expectations of a simple process and may be unprepared - and perhaps affected financially - by the complexities of City regulations and requirements. By the same token, homeowners wanting to renovate their homes can also be very surprised by unknown and unexpected regulations and by the timelines created by the permit processing backlog. There has long been a real concern regarding the lack of capacity to provide the extra time commitment required to meet the needs of these people.

The system also challenges experienced applicants who may try to achieve maximum allowable discretion and/or convince staff to interpret regulations in a different way. In either case, additional meetings and changes to drawings and documents may be required, either of which can negatively affect processing times. The fact that some applicants will knowingly submit careless applications to "get into the system", can also have an impact on processing times.

5. Infrastructure

There is a lack of supportive Information Technology to facilitate: application assignment and tracking; efficient applicant and public information exchange regarding project status; consolidated site and project history for efficient and coordinated review and understanding of actions required; and complaint tracking. Work is underway on this and required Information Technology systems will be the subject of a future report to Council.

ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGES: RESOURCES REQUIRED FOR PERMIT PROCESSING

In order to meet the current demands and challenges of permit processing in the City, Development Services and Engineering Services have already been supporting six temporary positions. Staff are proposing that these positions be regularized and that a further 11.5 positions be approved for these two departments and three others, for a total of 17.5 positions over two years. Staff believe that the introduction of these positions will allow the departments to narrow the gap between customer needs and service provided and to maintain an improved level of service, providing volumes remain at the current growth rate and providing regulations and complexity do not measurably increase.

Development Services closely monitors volumes and processing times on a regular basis and will be able to accurately assess improvements in times. In addition, staff have conducted customer surveys, regularly met with customers who have had proposals for process improvements, engaged in project "forensics", and have requested feedback on new initiatives. In addition to this monitoring activity, staff will be introducing new means of obtaining feedback on service levels and suggested improvements.

In addition, as noted earlier, staff are suggesting that a concerted effort be made to reduce and synchronize regulations where possible and to introduce administrative ramifications as an important criteria in the analysis of proposed new policy. A report back on this topic is being recommended.

Appendix A details the requested staff resources for all 5 departments as they relate to the challenges identified and to the service improvements which staff anticipate. Appendix B provides details on costs and phasing.

The criteria staff have used to assess the need for these resources is the potential contribution of the position to either reduced processing time targets, customer service improvements, or both. In Development Services, because of training requirements and the pressures on existing staff and managers, staff are proposing a "phasing" of resources, with six positions starting in 2005 (three of these are currently filled on a temporary basis) and four starting in 2006. Staff will monitor service and processing time improvements and are recommending a report back to Council in November, 2005 which will identify improvements to that point and which will formalize the introduction of the final four positions in 2006. Conversion of one temporary Engineering Assistant IV position to regular in Engineering Services (Streets Design Branch), responsible for Building Grade designs, has not been included in this report, as further analysis is required. Assessment of the ongoing need for this position will be included in the November report.

This request is a corporate initiative, with five departments included in the staffing request. These departments have jointly identified a total of 17.5 positions required to meet service needs:

Department

Total # of Positions

# Conversions from Temporary to Regular

Start Year

2005

Start Year

2006

Total # Requiring Additional Funding from Operating Budget (2005 & 2006)

# Requiring approval of position

Development Services

10

3

6

4

6 in 2005

4 in 2006

10

Engineering Services

4 (1 exempt)

3

4

 

2

4

Planning

1

0

1

  

1

1

Legal Services

1.5

0

1.5

  

1.5

1.5

Real Estate Services

1

0

1

  

.5 (.5 from PEF)

0

Totals

17.5

6

13.5

4

15

16.5

ALTERNATIVES/OPTIONS

Alternatives to the resource increase requested and to the regulatory review recommended have been continuously explored and implemented since the Development and Building Review (DBR) and the inception of the Development Services Department. The purpose of DBR was to identify improvements to the processes and structures in place to support permitting activity. Many of these changes were implemented and many more have been reviewed and put in place since 2000. Development Services is engaged with many other departments in a process of continuous improvement and as a result, has increased inter-departmental coordination and relationships with a view to streamlining the process for customers. Timelines have also been improved.

The process of continuous improvement will continue whether additional staff are approved or not, but at this point will be greatly hampered by lack of time and resources for initiation and follow-through.

Maintaining the status quo is an option. One result of this will be increased processing times - certainly in peak periods which are either the result of typical seasonal changes or of increased development activity overall. Staff also envisage a rising number of complaints, from both applicant customers and the community, and staff burnout with a subsequent increase in turnover.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The financial implications of adding a large number of staff to five departments are significant. At the same time, the growing revenue generated every year by Development and Building Permit activity is also significant. To illustrate, following are the revenue figures since 2000:

 

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Actual

$14,180,749

$16,188,965

$17,223,372

$18,597,332

$21,231,079

$ Increase

  

$ 2,008,216

$ 1,034,407

$ 1,373,960

$ 2,633,747

% Increase

  

14.16%

6.39%

7.98%

14.16%

The cumulative revenue increase form 2000 to 2004 is $7,050,300 which represents an increase of approximately 49.7% in four (4) years. Annual inflationary fee increases represent approximately 12% of this revenue growth rate. The 2005 revenue budget forecast of $21,921,100 represents a further increase of $690,000 (3.25%) over 2004 actual revenue receipts. The revenue budget for 2005 does not include an estimated revenue increase of $420,000 (10 months) based on a new "2005 Zoning, Building and Trade Permit Inflationary Fee Increases" report scheduled for Council on February 3, 2005. The revenue fee increases from this report are based on a proposed 2.75% fee increase effective March 1, 2005.
 
Additionally, annual fee revenue increases of up to $636,000 for Development Applications and $328,000 for Rezoning Applications have been identified and could be added to annual revenue budget estimates if the "Rezoning and Development Application Fee Increase" report scheduled for Council in March 2005, is approved. Based on historical annual revenue increases and proposed new fee increases, the costs of funding this staffing initiative for 5 departments can easily be covered by increased revenue.

Over the same time period, the volume of application intake increased by 26.25%, with an average annual growth rate of 6.56%, indicating that revenue increase is a function of both volumes and project value and commensurate complexity.

By contrast, in the same time period in which both revenue and volumes have increased substantially, the staff complement for permit processing has grown only by one new time-limited position in Development Services (a Project Facilitator for projects in the new Heritage Incentive Program) and the six temporary positions created in Development Services and Engineering Services which are included in this report's resources request.

Cost Summary:

The net additional annual salary impact on the City operating budget is $780,400 (prorated to 390,200) in 2005. Four positions proposed to be added in 2006 are all related to Development Services. The net annual salary costs in 2006 for all departments are $1,089,350.

One time costs in 2005 for computer/telephone/desk/network costs are estimated at $5,000 per person, or a total of $70,000. 2006 costs for this purpose are estimated at $20,000.

In addition, because Development Services is located in the East Wing, which has no available space and no capacity to expand, a group of staff will have to be moved - most likely to City Square - to make room for additional Development Services staff. DS staff must be housed in one location because of its customer service nature, with tens of thousands of people coming to the Department for service each year.

While details have not yet been worked out, one-time costs in 2005 for leasehold and moving expenses have been estimated at $175,000 based on 2 recent department/staff relocations to the City Square mall facility. Annual lease costs are estimated at $105,000 based on 2005 lease rates at the City Square facility.

Cost Summary Impact by Year

Net Salary Related Costs:

2005

2005 Prorated

2006

Development Services

371,711

185,856

671,511

Engineering Services

140,529

70,265

143,691

Planning

90,202

45,101

92,232

Legal Services

141,381

70,691

144,562

Real Estate Services

36,532

18,266

37,354

Total Net Salary Costs (Rounded)

780,400

390,200

1,089,350

Plus - One Time Costs:

    

 

Leasehold Improvements & Moving

175,000

175,000

 

Space Lease

105,000

52,500

108,150

Computer/Furniture/Equipment

70,000

70,000

20,000

Total Net Program Costs

1,130,400

687,700

1,217,500

CONCLUSION

With increased challenges, particularly with regard to increased regulations and complexity and volumes, greater involvement from the public, staff turnover, applicant knowledge and inadequate infrastructure, the gap is growing between the needs and expectations of permit applicants and the public and the City's ability to deliver good service. In a corporate initiative, Development Services, on behalf of five departments, is requesting a staffing increase of 17.5 positions over two years and an initiative to review existing and proposed regulations. Staff anticipate that together, these initiatives will significantly improve permitting services.

* * * * *

 

APPENDIX A
Requested Positions, Challenges addressed and Service Improvements Anticipated

Depart-ment

Position

Function

Challenge to be addressed

Year

Service Improvement Goals

         

Service Quality

Processing Time

Develop-ment Services

Development Assistant - Administration Group

Assist Project Facilitators with public meetings, neighbourhood notification, timely response to queries

Increased involvement from the participating public

2005

Increase in timeliness of service to applicants using PFs; timely response to resident queries; increase in public involvement capacity

N/A

 

2 Development Assistants - Processing Centre -Development

Customer service
assistance; permit
processing

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Additional service to Development Permit applicants; reduction of workload of existing Project Coordinators; reduction of backlog; some fast-tracking

Along with other positions, will contribute to the reduction in Development Permit processing times by 2 weeks, from an average in 2004 of 13 Weeks

 

Project Facilitator I

Provide Project Facilitation services to complex "Director of Planning" projects

Increased involvement from the participating public; service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Additional service to 20-30 projects per year; reduction of workload of existing Project Coordinators; reduction of backlog

Reduce processing times for 20-30 complex projects by 2 weeks.
Along with other positions, will contribute to the reduction in other Development Permit processing times by 2 weeks, from an average in 2004 of 13 Weeks

 

Customer Service Specialist - Enquiry Centre

Provide timely and comprehensive service to novice applicants; provide on-going training and direction to other staff re customer service

Knowledge and competency of applicants; service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Specialized, dedicated service to novice business applicants/prospective applicants

To fast track projects where possible; possible reduction in timelines by 6 weeks, from an average in 2004 of 13 Weeks

 

Enquiry Centre Officer

To fast track single family "conditional" permits; provide one-stop, integrated service

Knowledge and competency of applicants; service and timelines related to complexity/volumes

2005

Specialized, dedicated service to applicants with home renovations, additions and alterations - often novice applicants

Double this existing service (approximately 200 additional applications); reduce processing time for these by 6-8 weeks

         

Service Quality

Processing Time

 

Project Facilitator III

Manage and facilitate contentious social service and housing projects; training and supervision

Increased involvement from the participating public

2006

Specialized, expert facilitation service to contentious social service and housing projects

N/A

 

Customer Service Representative

Identify novice applicants at first contact; provide technical expertise at front counter; screen and stream applications

Knowledge and competency of applicants; service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2006

Improved service to novice applicants through expert information and streaming; increase in number of projects processed "over-the-counter"

N/A

 

2 Customer Service Specialists - Processing Centre

Specialized service to applicants having difficulty; on-going training and documentation; information workshops to customers; complaint management

Knowledge and competency of applicants; staff turnover, training and performance

2006

Increase and improve information to applicants through training and info workshops; more timely assistance to applicants in need

N/A

Engineer-ing Services

2 Engineering Assistant III - Development Services Branch

Review permit applications for Engineering concerns; provide service to applicants regarding Engineering requirements

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Provide prompt Engineering reviews of Development and Building applications. To retain existing staff.

To keep pace with existing demand; contribute to reduction in processing times estimated by Development Services

 

Engineering Assistant IV - Parking Branch

Review permit applications for Engineering concerns; provide service to applicants regarding Engineering requirements

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Provide prompt Engineering reviews of Development and Building applications. To retain existing staff.

To keep pace with existing demand; contribute to reduction in processing times estimated by Development Services

Depart-ment

Position

Function

Challenge to be Addressed

Year

Service Improvement Goals

         

Service Quality

Processing Time

 

Surveyor II
(Assistant City Surveyor - exempt)

Provide advice, review and direction on land tenure matters, legal agreements and street and lane dedications.

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Provide prompt Engineering reviews of Development and Building applications.

To keep pace with existing demand; contribute to reduction in processing times estimated by Development Services

Planning

Development Planner III

Urban design review of Development Permit applications; assess design ramifications of density increases

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Improved timeliness in review and negotiation of urban design in development applications

To keep pace with existing demand; contribute to reduction in processing times estimated by Development Services

Legal Services

Solicitor III

Provide legal advice to staff and applicants; prepare legal agreements

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Improve service to complex projects requiring legal agreements.

Reduce processing times (from decision to issuance) for those projects requiring legal agreements - up to 4-6 weeks. (Current timelines are variable.)

 

.5 Legal Assistant I

Assist Solicitor III

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Improve service to complex projects requiring legal agreements.

Contribute to reduction in processing times generated by Solicitor III

Real Estate Services

Property Negotiator II

Provide necessary analysis and financial negotiations for heritage, amenity and housing bonus applications

Service and timelines related to complexity and volumes

2005

Provide prompt and fair economic analyses (pro forma) for Heritage projects in particular

Reduce processing times for Heritage projects by 2-4 weeks, from a current estimate of 24 Weeks

 

LINK TO APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C

DETAILS OF POSITIONS REQUESTED

1. Development Assistant - Administration (Development Services Department)

Rationale

There are currently five Project Facilitator positions (and two more requested) who handle all their own internal and external meeting organization, set-up and documentation. They have no "Planning Assistant"- type help to set up public meetings, answer applicant calls and queries from residents, provide background research, relay information regarding project status, provide written information to residents, and enter data in the computer system.

Purpose

· To provide assistance to Project Facilitators regarding meeting scheduling, compilation of notification responses, data gathering, research, public meeting organization and set-up.
· To undertake graphics, customer and public information regarding project facilitation and project scoping.
· To answer project-specific queries from customers and residents.
· To act as a resource to Development Services' partner departments in joint initiatives.

Impacts

· Increase in the capacity to effectively respond to, and manage, the interest of neighbourhoods and residents to participate in the development process.
· Reduction of Project Facilitator time spent on public process organization, clerical work and other related non-professional activities.
· A significant increase in the capacity of Project Facilitators to effectively manage projects.

2 and 3. Development Assistants (2) - Processing Centre - Development (PC-D) (Development Services Department)

Rationale

The Project Coordinators (PCs) in the Processing Centre-Development handle a workload of 40-50 projects. Their main task is to undertake all the technical calculations required to ensure compliance with the Zoning and Development By-Law and guidelines and to work with Engineering with regard to compliance with the Parking By-Law. As the primary point of customer contact for all significant development projects not assigned to Project Facilitators, they also are required to coordinate with all other involved departments, to address customer needs and queries, to undertake public notification and resultant responses and to problem -solve when possible. Because of workload and training issues, the non-technical aspects of this work are sometimes not fulfilled as completely as the customers and neighbourhood respondents require. To assist the Project Coordinators in these components of the work, the Development Assistants will "team" with the PCs for the more complex projects and handle the non-technical pieces.

They will also have a project load of their own, which will include the technical work. This will improve not only processing times, by reducing PC workload, but will also improve the timeliness of customer contact.

Purpose

· To provide customer service and other non-technical assistance to Project Coordinators.
· To add to application processing capacity.
· Fast-tracking of less complex applications such as outdoor patios, minor amendments, some changes of use.

Impacts

· Reduction in processing times for some development permit applications by 2 weeks.
· Reduction in workload for all Project Coordinators.
· Better, quicker and more consistent response to development permit customers and resident queries and concerns.

4. Project Facilitator I - Administration (Development Services Department)

Rationale

The role of Project Facilitators (PF) has been one of the major success stories of the Development and Building Review, which had originally recommended 16 of these positions. The Project Facilitator position acts like a project manager, advocating - not for the project itself or specific City objectives - but for a streamlined, timely and seamless process, no matter the outcome. Project Facilitators are the primary point of customer and community contact, they set timelines in consultation with applicants and expert staff, they manage public involvement processes and they engage in conflict resolution when it is required. We have heard repeatedly from customers, colleagues in other departments and residents, that they sincerely appreciate the level of service provided. The five (5) existing PFs have a workload of up to 20 active projects at any point in time; four (4) of them handling mostly "major" projects destined for the decision at the Development Permit Board and one of which handles projects in the Heritage Incentive Program. There is currently no capacity for Project Facilitators to take on additional projects which may not be destined for decision by the Development Permit Board, but which could benefit greatly from project facilitation expertise.

Purpose

· To provide project facilitation to complex projects destined for "Director of Planning" decisions.

Impacts

· Increase in the number of facilitated projects (approximately 20-30).
· Improved timelines for these projects and a commensurate improvement in timelines for other projects through a workload reduction for the Project Coordinators. Estimated reduction in processing time for the PF projects is two weeks.
· Improved attraction/retention of exemplary staff in the department through the availability of an additional bridge position.

5. Customer Service Specialist - Enquiry Centre (Development Services Department)

Rationale

There has been a long-standing need for dedicated, specialized service to novice applicants. Because of workload, volume and staff turnover, Development Services has not been able to respond to this need. Customers or prospective customers wanting to open new businesses, in particular, can be confused and discouraged - and sometimes negatively financially affected - by the range of regulations and requirements that they must satisfy. While we can't change the requirements, with a dedicated resource we can identify those customers who require extra service; ensure they receive complete and timely information so that they know what is required (including whether they need design professionals); provide a primary point of contact so that the applicant feels as if they have a safety net and provide problem-solving expertise if required. Because one position cannot handle all the applicants who might wish to use it, the incumbent will act in conjunction with colleagues in the Enquiry Centre to increase the service capacity of the whole work group.

Purpose

· To provide specialized service to novice applicants (primarily small business).
· To ensure that these applicants are identified and then are streamed, if necessary, to the appropriate staff.
· To act as a facilitator with other Enquiry Centre staff and staff in work groups in related departments so that the applicants are "taken care of" throughout the process.
· To provide on-going advice and training to Enquiry Centre colleagues regarding service standards for novice applicants.

Impacts

· Major increase in information and expertise provided to novice applicants.
· Likely reduction in timelines for projects of these applicants (because the applicants will not be left to their own devices, this decrease in timeline could be substantial).

6. Enquiry Centre Officer - Enquiry Centre (EC) (Development Services Department)

Rationale

One of the initiatives implemented by Development Services to reduce processing times has been to divert one of the Enquiry Centre Officer positions to solely processing some of the simpler "conditional" development permit applications - primarily renovations to single family dwellings. The intent of this was also to provide one-stop service to the applicants/owners of these projects, many of whom are unfamiliar with our system. Capacity of this position has been reached, but there are at least double the number of projects which could be handled in this way. This position will also address the needs of novice applicants, although others will also be able to avail themselves of this service.

Purpose

· To process as many "conditional" projects as possible outside of the complex stream (up to an additional 200 projects per year).
· To provide one-stop, integrated service to customers of these projects.

Impacts

· Substantial reduction of processing times for simple "conditional" projects - 6-8 weeks.
· Commensurate reduction of workload and processing times for more complex development permit applications.

7. Project Facilitator III - Administration (Development Services Department)

Rationale

The general background for this position is as for 4. on Page 2 (Project Facilitator I) above. More specifically, Development Services has recently been working with a number of other departments regarding the development of protocols for "contentious" social service and non-market housing projects. These projects can be very time-consuming for a variety of reasons: the overwhelming interest expressed on the part of neighbours; the negotiations required with other levels of government; the fact that the "developer" is normally a not-for-profit agency with little experience in either development or public or public involvement processes and the number of departments involved in the review process. There is a need for a service specialist for these projects. Additionally, as the Senior Project Facilitator, the incumbent of this position would take on responsibility for some corporate/public priority projects and would perform a supervisory function.

Purpose

· To manage and facilitate contentious social service and non-market housing applications and some corporate priority projects.
· To provide an on-going training function for new and junior staff.
· To provide supervision to the Project Assistant, Development Assistant and Junior Project Facilitator.

Impacts

· Improved and coordinated service to contentious project applicants and developers, most of whom are unfamiliar with the system.
· Improved training capacity.

8.Customer Service Representative in Enquiry Centre (EC) (Development Services Department)

Rationale

A recommendation of the Development and Building Review was to rotate Enquiry Centre Officers (ECOs) into the first-customer-contact position at the front desk, so there would always be an experienced and highly knowledgeable staff person there. Because of customer wait times for ECOs and the necessity of maintaining the Phone Centre, which is also a rotation for ECOs, this has not been possible. The positions now providing service at the front desk are experts in customer service, but not in the requirements of the Building and Zoning and Development By-Laws. In any case, there are not enough of these positions to handle the customer volume. During peak seasons - spring and summer - wait times can be up to 2½ hours.

Equally important, with the approval of the Customer Service Specialist position for novice applicants, the Customer Service Representative will work in conjunction with this position, providing appropriate identification of novice applicants, accurate streaming of applicants/enquiries, thorough screening of applications and will also provide back-up to the Customer Advocate. It is also anticipated that some application processing will be possible for this position.

Purpose

· To provide initial identification of novice applicants requiring the services of the Customer Advocate.
· To accurately "stream" applications at intake.
· To provide a thorough screening of applications at intake.
· To refuse incomplete or inappropriate applications.
· To process very simple (less time-consuming) applications at the front desk.
· To provide technical expertise at the front counter.

Impacts

· Increased service to novice applicants.
· Accurate streaming of applications.
· Reduction in processing times for some applications.
· Distribution of applications to appropriate work group.

9 & 10. Customer Service Specialist - Processing Centre-Development (PC-D) and Processing Centre - Building (PC-B) (Development Services Department)

Rationale

There is a critical requirement in both PC-D and PC-B to provide assistance to applicants and to the managers by addressing the service needs of applicants who don't understand or are having difficulty with permitting processes and by improving our processes of dealing with complaints.
From time to time, applicants may also require information sessions where new or innovative process changes require explanation or where there is an identified pattern of applicants not understanding certain aspects of the by-laws.

In addition, there is currently little capacity in Development Services to develop and implement training and to document critical information.

To improve both processing timelines and customer service in terms of accuracy, consistency and comprehensiveness of advice and information, it is crucial that the department address the problems faced as a result of the length of time required for staff to become technically comfortable and competent, the lack of managerial time to train staff, and the dearth of documentation on accepted by-law interpretations.

Purpose

· To provide special service to applicants who don't understand the by-laws/permitting processes.
· To assist the managers in addressing complaints which come forward.
· To address the on-going training and documentation needs of the Processing Centre.
· To improve the accuracy and consistency of by-law information and advice given by staff.
· To provide on-the-spot assistance to staff as required.
· To process permits as time allows.

Impacts - Short term

· Better service to applicants having difficulty with permit review processes.
· More prompt response to complaints.
· Greater consistency of application review and by-law interpretation.
· Reduction of errors.
· Through relief to the Manager, more time to implement process improvements.

Impacts - Long-term

· Reduced processing times as staff are appropriately and more thoroughly trained.
· Better service and reduced times because of more comprehensive documentation
· Greater accuracy and consistency of advice and information provided to customers.
· Addressing attraction/retention issues by providing a bridge position between technical staff and the Scoper and Project Facilitator positions.

11,12, & 13. Engineering Assistant III - Projects Branch (2 Positions) and Engineering Assistant IV - Parking Branch (Engineering Services)

Rationale

Engineering staff in their Development Services group (Projects Branch), the Survey Branch, and the Parking Branch provide the majority of input into development reviews, and coordinate the input from other Engineering branches. The Development Services group, which includes Engineering's Building Sites Inspectors, also manages construction site impacts on adjacent city streets and surrounding neighbourhoods, handles public complaints, and staffs Engineering's Client Services Centre.

In response to increased development activity, project complexity, and neighbourhood expectations, three temporary positions have been created in the last 1½ years. In addition, Engineering has reallocated resources within the Projects Branch to provide approximately ½ FTE more EA IV support for DP reviews and construction site management. The temporary positions would need to become regular full-time positions if Community Services increases its permit processing capacity, in order for Engineering to keep up with the additional permit load. The existing positions are:

These positions have been funded from associated Engineering revenues such as crossing, anchor rod, and street use fees. It is expected that these fees would continue to cover the funding required when the positions become regular.

Purpose

· Review Development and Building Permit applications for Engineering concerns.
· Meet with developers and architects regarding Engineering requirements.
· Liaise with other Engineering branches, Planning, the Development Services Dept., Legal Services, Parks, etc.
· Review excavation, shoring, crossing, and street use applications.
· Handle public enquiries regarding construction impacts at development sites.
· Assist the Engineering Client Services Centre with permit issuance, developer inquiries, etc.

Impacts

· Retain existing trained staff in key positions by reducing the turnover associated with temporary positions.
· Maintain capacity to process development applications at rates such as those experienced during 2004, and meet the City's advertised service levels.
· Provide capacity to manage construction site activities and impacts on public realm, pedestrians, traffic, and neighbours.

14. Assistant City Surveyor (Surveyor II - Exempt) - Land Survey Branch (Engineering Services)

Rationale

The City Surveyor takes a lead role for Engineering Services on many development and building permitting matters, providing advice, review and direction on matters pertaining to the form of land tenure, legal agreements (rights-of-ways, options to purchase, encroachment agreements, etc.)and street and lane dedications required. The Land Survey Branch provides assistance in reviewing all permitting activity types, including single family dwellings. The Land Survey Branch currently fields over 5000 public inquiries per year.

Over the course of the last 25 years, development proposals and their technical and land tenure-related matters have become more complex. Mixed use developments, the proliferation of air space parcels, the intensity of strata title developments, increased heights and densities and more recently the heritage incentives program and building envelope repairs have resulted in the City Surveyor being immersed daily in development activities, with time being stretched beyond reasonable limits by current activities. Other, more traditional land survey tasks have suffered as a result.

The involvement of the Land Survey Branch begins at the earliest conception of the project and continues through until the project is occupied. The heaviest time commitment on a project is commonly between the time an applicant receives their conditions of approval and the point that the development permit is issued. The land tenure matters and related legal agreements are often the source of delay in issuing a permit.

The additional resources being added, particularly in Legal Services and the new Project Facilitators, will have an additional impact on the expectations placed on the City Surveyor and the Land Survey Branch.

Identified City priority projects, such as RAV, Woodward's, Hastings Park, VCCEP, etc. require an intense involvement of a land survey professional. The time that must be committed to these projects is currently not available in the land survey branch if other projects are going to continue to be processed.

The learning curve for this new position will be steep and intense and it is critical that this position be filled before the increased through-put created by the additional resources sought in this report are in place

Purpose

The position requested is for a second Assistant City Surveyor. The existing position will focus on technical matters, dealing with the more traditional (core) land surveying activities of the branch. The new position will provide a resource to deal with the increasing demands on the City Surveyor as they being requested to development and building reviews. Additionally the new position is being created:

Impacts

15. Development Planner - Urban Design and Development Planning Centre (Planning Department)

Rationale

Development Planners are an intrinsic part of the Development application process, reviewing proposals against policies, regulations and guidelines in the various discretionary zoning areas of the city. These range from the highest density projects in the Downtown District, to single family homes in conditional zones (i.e., RS-5) where higher design quality is sought. Beyond sheer volume, Development Planners have been responding to a variety of policy and regulatory initiatives that play out in Development applications, specifically numerous higher density developments, the complexity of which has been substantially expanded. These typically involve the pursuit by the developer of additional density in exchange for various public benefits and public amenities, the impacts of which must be carefully assessed in urban design terms (public and private views, liveability/privacy impacts, loss of useable open space, etc.). This often generates the need for alternative design options to be investigated/negotiated to optimize desired public benefits and impacts of added density so as to maintain the city's high standard of urban design and liveability.

The city's unprecedented growth and rate of development is expected to be sustained over the next five years. However, even without increased activity, there is a need for an additional urban design resource to maintain the quality of development which has allowed us to increase density and population without sacrificing liveability.

Purpose

· To maintain the present high standard of urban design review and analysis of development applications against Council-approved policy, regulations and guidelines.
· To assess urban design ramifications of density increases resulting from pursuit of other corporate policies in development applications.
· To generate alternative urban design concepts to determine optimum balancing of corporate objectives in development scenarios.
Impacts

· Improved timeliness in review and negotiation of urban design in major development applications.
· Improved capacity to respond to corporate initiatives.

16. Solicitor III (Legal Services)

Rationale

Currently, with vastly increased project complexity, several large corporate and public priority projects, and the pursuit of public policy objectives requiring security through legal agreements, the demand on the time of Legal Services has risen dramatically. Any increase in the development services offered to the public (requiring legal opinions, agreements and registrations) would immediately affect the already hectic workload in Legal Services, requiring that legal work would have to be referred to outside counsel, resulting in a further strain on Legal Services' already depleted outside legal budget. In addition, there is presently no time for Legal Services staff to work with other departments on process improvements, nor to provide badly needed training to other departments' staff (e.g., training to staff regarding thorough and detailed instructions to Legal Services and regarding how to most expediently review drafts of agreements).

Purpose

· To provide a solicitor who would be dedicated to providing service (opinions, training, preparation of legal agreements) to the departments involved in the permitting process

Impacts

· More expedient service to applicants requiring legal agreements.
· Service improvements through training.
· Reduction in post-decision processing times for those projects requiring legal agreements -by up to 4-6 weeks.

16.5. Legal Assistant I (.5 Position) (Legal Services)

Rationale

A Solicitor position requires the support of a Legal Assistant. It is feasible for one Legal Assistant to provide support for two lawyers. Accordingly, a .5 FTE position is required. Legal Assistant workload is also extremely high and it would not be possible for the new position to function well with support from an Assistant. There is currently one Legal Assistant supporting three lawyers.

Purpose and Impacts

· To support the Solicitor III position and facilitate impacts thereof.

17.5. Property Negotiator II (Real Estate Services Department)

Rationale

The Real Estate Services Department is responsible for the economic analysis (pro forma) for all heritage bonuses that are given by the City. In addition, all amenity and housing bonuses are also analyzed and the financial aspects of the deal are negotiated by Real Estate. This financial analysis is done to ensure the actual bonus recommended to Council is fair to the applicant, but does not represent a windfall profit.

With Council's approval of the Gastown, Chinatown and Hastings Street Heritage Incentive program, the volume of Heritage enquiries and actual applications requiring detailed financial analysis has increased from an average of 9 or 10 active files to 35-40 active files. In addition to volume, the complexity of amenity and housing bonuses has also increased. A few examples include Shangrila, Woodwards, the Vogue Theatre and 840-848 West Hastings Street. Real Estate Services is continuing to do its usual work and with its involvement in Woodwards, South East False Creek, 1 Kingsway, East Fraser Lands and RAV, it is unable to meet the timelines for the analysis and negotiations of all these bonus requests without letting suffer other important work, including prudently managing the City's real estate assets.

Purpose

· To provide the necessary analysis and financial negotiations for the heritage, amenity and housing bonus applications in the time frame expected for expedited applications.

Impacts

· Reduction of processing times in Real Estate for bonus applications - by 2-4 weeks.
· Assurance that bonuses are fair to both the City and the developer.
· Prudent management of the City's Real Estate Assets.

APPENDIX D

PERMITS AND PERMISSIONS PROCESSED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Permits

Building - Certified Professional (CP), non-CP,
Demolition
Development
Development/Building
Drain Tile
Fire Warden (tank removal)
Signs
Street Occupancy
Tenant Improvement
Tent and Temporary Staging Permits
Trades - Plumbing, Gas, Electrical, Sprinkler
Tree Removal
Over-the-Counter Permits:

Building (BU), Development (DE) and Development/Building (DB) additions, changes of use, minor amendments, revisions, interior/exterior alterations, accessory buildings/uses, zoning reviews for business licenses (for all forms of development), Grow-Ops cleanup, Demolition, Pool, Phase out suites, Antenna, Bed and Breakfast, Secondary Suites.

Applications for special inspections

Change of Address
Change of Use
Grow-Ops
Secondary Suite
Sprinkler

Applications for Subdivision and Strata

Airspace
Bare Land Strata
Conventional Subdivision
Phased Strata
Strata Tile Conversion

INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN PERMIT PROCESSING

Engineering

Environmental Protection

Fire and Rescue Services

Housing Centre

Licenses and Inspections

Legal Services

Office of the Chief Building Official

Parks

Planning - general

Heritage - Planning Department

Rezoning - Planning Department

Urban Design and Development Planning - Planning Department

Office of Cultural Affairs

Real Estate Services

Social Planning

cs20050203.htm

Comments or questions? Send us e-mail at info@city.vancouver.bc.ca
© 2002 City of Vancouver