REPORT TO COUNCIL

COMMUNITY/INDUSTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

FOR THE REZONING, PERMITTING AND INSPECTION (NEW) PROCESS

April 30, 1999

INFORMATION RTS File No. 00685

CC File: 3151

Council: May 18, 1999

1. Second Report to Council

The Community/Industry Advisory Committee (CIAC) has adopted the following wording for its correspondence, agendas and minutes:

PREAMBLE

The City of Vancouver is implementing a new Development and Building Review Process to “radically improve the manner in which we do business, emphasizing customer service and efficient, equitable processes while ensuring quality and safety”. City Council has appointed the Community/Industry Advisory Committee to actively review the process as it evolves. The Committee has 12 members, equally balanced between community and industry representatives, who are serving a four-year term from 1998-2002.

MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of the Community/Industry Advisory Committee is to encourage, advise and assist in the implementation of Vancouver’s new development and building process.

Committee Activities - November 27, 1998 to April 1999

During these second six months, the Committee has recognized that the new process needs to expand and become more efficient. Following a strategic planning session, we have identified specific tasks on which to focus. For each task, a subcommittee composed of one or more Committee members generated a work plan that provided for monitoring and implementation. These work plans and the members in each subcommittee are as follows:

1. Monitoring Information Technology (IT) Implementation

- Charlie Richmond

2. Community Involvement in the New Process

- Joyce Catliff / Sean McEwen / Bob Heaslip / Catherine Youngren /Charlie Richmond

3. Monitoring Human Resources

- Sophia Lum / Bob Brewster

4. Monitoring/Editing CIAC Web Site Information

- Brian Palmquist

5. Analysis of DBR Physical Requirements

- Catherine Youngren

6. Implementation of Sectoring/Area Generalist

- Joyce Catliff / Dimas Craveiro

7. Monitoring of New Process on a Project Specific Basis

- Tom Staniszkis / Angie Lee / Brian Palmquist

8. CIAC Participation/Comments/Reactions to On-Site Audits

- Don Pamplin / Catherine Youngren

9. CIAC Administration and Management

- Bob Heaslip / Rick Scobie

Subsequent to the first reporting period, the meetings from November 27, 1998 through April 1999 have included the following:

November 27, 1998

· City staff encouraged to involve themselves in the CIAC consultative process to facilitate the transition to the new Development and Building Review (DBR) process.

December 11, 1998

· Decision taken to establish Web site.
· Adoption of chair and co-chair for a six-month term to facilitate continuity and effectiveness.
· Job descriptions for Project Facilitator, Project Scoper, Project Coordinator and Customer Service Representatives reviewed.

January 8, 1999

· Strategic planning workshop facilitated by Catherine Youngren; work plans to be developed by Committee members.

January 22, 1999

· Legal Director of Planning and three Co-Directors met with Committee to explain their respective areas of responsibility and co-management roles.
· Mission statement of Committee agreed upon by members.

February - April 1999

· Work plans reviewed.
· Effectiveness of First Meetings in DBR process analyzed.

February 19 and March 5, 1999

· Letters to CUPE and IBEW inviting their input to CIAC.
· Work plans No. 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 approved; Work plans No. 2 and 6 discussed.

March 26, 1999

· Discussion of meetings with Project Teams.
· Discussion of items for report to Council.

April 9 and 23, 1999

· CIAC received updates on Task Force review of the new DBR process.
· Presentation of three project tracking systems currently in use.
· Presentation by a development consultant on the new DBR process.

Summary Statement

A. DBR First Meetings and CIAC Monitoring

CIAC members are informed of First Meetings and subsequent meetings between project applicants and City project teams. Efforts are made to attend First Meetings where potential problems are noted and discussed with the intent of addressing them at the onset of the application process. The nature of these meetings leads to open discussion among the participants and imparts a transparency to the process.

CIAC members are unanimous in their support for these initial meetings where project scoping documents are often presented. The participation by department representatives and effective management by Project Scopers, Facilitators and Coordinators are considered to be a measurable improvement over the legacy process. Members have documented instances where major problems were flagged by City staff that would have otherwise been left to be discovered at a later date and therefore become “late hits” with considerable impact on the project. This is an example of the new process providing customer service.

The problems identified by CIAC members are as follows:

· Lack of formal community involvement.
· Difficulty in bringing together many participants involved with larger projects.
· A key City representative may not be available at a First Meeting with project applicant.
· Substantial amounts of work and resources are expended in preparation for the First Meeting.
· Lack of continuity since there are no Area Generalists assigned to different sectors of the City.

B. Resignation of General Manager, Community Services

CIAC is concerned with the effect of the resignation of Ted Droettboom (the former General Manager of Community Services) on the DBR process. The Committee has been made aware of problems with Information Technology, resources and commitment by City departments. For the most part, these problems seem to be part of the change to a new process from an old one.

The new process has been shown to be a superior alternative in the cases monitored by the CIAC. The problems inherent in change should not deter from recognizing the overall benefits of the new Development and Building Review process. CIAC has written a letter to the City Manager stating its concerns and requesting direct involvement in the Task ForceReview of the DBR process. CIAC has been advised that direct involvement will occur, commencing with an informal session scheduled for May 7, 1999.

Bob Heaslip, Chair Sophia Lum, Co-Chair
Community/Industry Advisory Committee Community/Industry Advisory Committee

CITY MANAGER’S COMMENTS

The City Manager submits the foregoing for INFORMATION.

- - - -

APPENDIX A

COMMUNITY/INDUSTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Members

Community Representatives:

R. J. (Bob) Brewster

Joyce Catliff

Angie Lee

Sophia Lum

Sean McEwen

Charlie Richmond

Industry Representatives:

Dimas Craveiro
Certified Professional Committee

Bob Heaslip
Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association

Brian Palmquist
Urban Development Institute

Tom Staniszkis
Architectural Institute of BC

Dana Taylor (Alternate: Don Pamplin)
Mechanical Contractors Association of BC

Catherine Youngren
Interior Designers Institute of BC

* * * * *

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver