Agenda Index City of Vancouver

POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE

TO:

Standing Committee on Planning & Environment

FROM:

Director of City Plans, Chief License Inspector and City Building Inspector, in consultation with Director of Housing Centre and Director of Legal Services

SUBJECT:

Secondary Suites: Program Compliance, Phase-out Suites and Enforcement Issues

 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

Council policy on secondary suites developed between 1986 and 1990. In summary, the policy is to:

· Allow secondary suites in the zoning for areas of the City that indicate they want them; and return areas that do not support them to single family [except for family suites];
· Allow family suites in the zoning for all single-family areas;
· Ensure that secondary suites meet basic safety and livability standards; and
· Enforce closure of illegal secondary suites in a gradual manner over time.

In addition, on June 6, 1995, Council approved CityPlan to provide directions for Vancouver. Two key directions related to secondary suites are:

· "Neighbourhood Housing Variety: ...increase neighbourhood housing variety throughout the city, especially in neighbourhood centres; and give people the opportunity to stay in their neighbourhood as their housing needs change and, by doing so, take a share of regional growth"; and

· "Addressing Housing Costs: ...increase the supply of subsidized and lower cost market housing throughout the city through the use of senior government programs, private sector incentives, and City regulations and subsidies".

SUMMARY

Ten years ago, Council began a program to allow secondary suites to be legal under the Zoning and Building By-laws. Over half the RS lots of the city were rezoned to allow suites after surveys indicated there was neighbourhood support. For older buildings, upgrading standards lower than full code requirements were put in place.

Since then, city-wide, about 20% of suites have entered the legal streams - becoming permanent or phase-out. [See below for definitions]. The figure is 22% in suite areas, and 14% in non-suite areas. A large portion of suites in both old and new buildings have not come forward, and remain illegal. To some degree it may be City standards which are deterring suite owners and home builders from conforming. Some of the requirements about which owners complain are the required ceiling heights and sprinklering [for older buildings]; location of electrical panel in a common area, and the requirement for non-strata title covenant on title [for new buildings].

The long term enforcement program, adopted in 1988, concentrates on implementing the phase-out, permanent, or family suite options, assuming owners would come forward voluntarily. We also enforce if there is an safety hazard, that we become aware of - usually through a complaint. Beyond this, the City does not actively seek out illegal suites, but enforce only on a complaint basis. Various practical problems with enforcement have arisen, including penalties which are not effective deterrents, and difficulties in ensuring that closed suites remain closed. This means that many owners probably feel that the cost and inconvenience of becoming legal are not outweighed by the risk of enforcement.

The 10-year phase-out suites are beginning to expire, and will come due for closure. The first group, in Joyce area, came due on April 1, 1999. Some owners are requesting extensions. Enforcing closure of these suites - which have met 10-year phase-out standards, and whose owners have been law-abiding - while illegal suites remain open, creates an inequitable situation. The continuing illegality of so many suites also presents issues for the future, in terms of having reasonable levels of safety and livability in this important housing component, ensuring some stability for tenants, and for the City's ability to enforce standards of maintenance.

Some options for action at this point are described at the end of this report. Given the City's original objectives with the suite program, augmented by the adopted CityPlan directions to ensure housing variety and affordability, staff recommend that Council approve a two-fold approach: re-examining standards, which may lead to lowering of some barriers to legalization; while also finding ways to make enforcement more effective.

In the meantime, staff recommend withholding enforcement on phase-out suites for a period of up to 3 years. It is reasonable to do this to provide owners with the opportunity to take advantage of any changes that result from the work. Enforcement on the basis of safety and complaints would continue as now.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of the current status of secondary suites; to outline some issues; and to recommend a course of action.

BACKGROUND

In the mid-'80s, after many years of tolerating secondary suites existing illegally in single family areas, City Council decided to act due to increasing concerns of various kinds. Many neighbours objected to the non-single family use, to parking problems, or to their perception that suite owners did not pay their fair share for city services. On the other hand, suite owners, tenants, and housing advocates were concerned to maintain suites as affordable housing and "mortgage helpers". The City was facing issues of liability for life safety in suites. Prior to the suite review, Council and staff had to deal with about 80 suite complaints a month. Since there was no opportunity for suites to become legal, the only choices were either to force the suite to close or to evaluate each one on a case by case basis to determine which owners merited being allowed to temporarily keep their suites due to "hardship".

The City's secondary suite program was developed over the course of many Council reports on different aspects of the issue. However, Council's objectives can be summarized as:

· Allow secondary suites in the zoning for areas of the City that indicate they want them; and return areas that do not support them to single family [other than for family suites];
· Allow family suites in the zoning for all single family areas;
· Ensure that secondary suites meet basic safety and livability standards; and
· Enforce closure of illegal secondary suites in a gradual manner over time.

CityPlan also includes directions to ensure housing variety in neighbourhoods, and housing affordability by various means. Secondary suites are important contributors to both these directions.

The first group of 10-year phase-out suites - about 165 units in the Joyce area - came due for closure on April 1, 1999. Some owners are requesting extensions. About 2000 phase-out suites in other areas will come up to their expiry dates between now and 2005, and staff anticipate there will be additional extension requests. Over the 10-year course of the secondary suite program, a number of issues relating to enforcement have arisen.

It is timely to step back and look at how the secondary suite program is meeting the original objectives, and whether adjustments are needed at this point. Staff have therefore prepared this overview which first summarizes what the City's policies and regulations are; second, outlines the current status of the suite situation, and issues that have arisen; and third, recommends a course of action.

This report deals only with the areas that were the subject of secondary suite zoning review -all the areas then zoned RS-1. [These areas have since been differentiated into RS-1, RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-5, RS-5S, RS-6.] Mixed use/commercial C zones, and other residential RT and RM zones already permitted suites and were not included in the review. A few small RS zones - RS-1A, RS-2, RS-1-B, and RS-4 - were also not included because they already permitted suites or other second units under some conditions.

DISCUSSION

1. Secondary Suites: Regulations and Enforcement Program

(a) Zoning

(b) Building By-law, Etc.

(c) Enforcement

2. Current Suite Compliance and Enforcement

(a) Compliance Levels and Issues

TABLE 1 - CURRENT SUITES STATUS

Area

 

Total
Houses

Total
Suites

Legal Suites

Illegal
Suites

Phase-Out

Permanent

Family

Suite Areas
[RS-1S, RS-5S]

number
% of houses
% of suites

30,443*
-
-

10,516*
35%
-

1257**
-
12%

1057**
-
10%

n.a.

8202
-
78%

Non-suite Areas
[RS-1, RS-3, RS-5]

number
% of houses
% of suites

35,587*
-
-

4900*
14%
-

606**
-
12%

-

99**
-
2%

4195
-
86%

All Areas

number
% of houses
% of suites

66,030*
-
-

15,416*
23%
-

1863**
-
12%

1057**
-
6%

99**
-
1%

12,397
-
80%

TABLE 2 - SUITES IN NEW BUILDINGS [CONSTRUCTED 1992-96]

(b) Enforcement Issues

3. Options for Action

This overview of the current status of suites has shown that too few suites are entering the suite program and taking up the legal options available. In particular, an unacceptable proportion of suites in brand new buildings are being installed illegally, when legality should be relatively easy. It is likely these patterns are due to the owners' or builders' assessment that the cost and inconvenience of meeting the requirements are greater than the likelihood and consequences of being caught. There are also numerous practical difficulties being encountered in enforcement.

There are a number of courses of action open to the City at this point.

Option 1: Continue on the current course: enforce closure of phase-out suites, while taking no action on unregistered suites unless there is an safety hazard or unresolvable complaints.

This results in continued and worsening inequity of enforcement, and does not address the problems of the large number of suites in non-conformity both in older and new buildings. Continuing to allow illegal suites to exist in such numbers, and to increase as new buildings are built, will likely necessitate revisiting of the entire issue in the future.

Option 2: Continue enforcing closure of expired phase-out suites, and increase enforcement efforts on other illegal, undeclared suites.

This would achieve more compliance and lessen the inequity of enforcement because the suites that remained illegal would eventually be closed. However, it could also cause the loss of affordable units, contradicting CityPlan directions on housing variety and affordability. It would not deal positively with the question of why a large number of suites have chosen not to register and conform. Some of these suites may be in reasonable condition, and upgradable. Also, in staff's view, the practical problems of enforcement and limited staff resources would have to be addressed before this approach would be feasible.

Option 3: Extend zoning to allow suites into non-suite areas, which would permit phase-out suites in these areas to become permanent, if the owners wish.

There are a number of reasons that this is not appropriate at this time, although it may be an option for the future. First reviewing the statistics on the proportion of suites which have registered, it is clear that non-declaration is prevalent whether an area is zoned for suites or not. So even if suites were made legal in non-suite areas, it would not address the main issues. Second, a substantial portion of the city is zoned to allow suites, there is no shortage of future housing capacity in this category - about 5000 potential units at current take-up rates. Finally, one of Council's policies in the suite review was to allow suites only in areas that supported them. The non-support of the areas in question was confirmed in two different polls at the time. Any extension of suite zoning is better considered after the Community Vision Program, slated to cover remaining areas by 2004, shows whether there is support. [The recently completed Dunbar Community Vision, for example, did indicate some support for extending the area that allows suites, although support was rather low -52%].

Option 4: Pursue a two-fold strategy of bringing more suites into conformity: reexamining standards and removing barriers wherever appropriate; and developing a more effective enforcement strategy and capability. In the meantime, allow phase-out suites to continue to exist beyond their permit expiry dates. In addition, continue current enforcement on the basis of safety issues and complaints.

In Recommendation A, staff propose pursuing Option 4 since it is most consistent with Council's objectives for secondary suites as noted earlier in the Background section of this report.

A standards review should include:

- consideration of City suite upgrading standards, particularly in light of new standards for suites in the BC building code;
- review of the costs of upgrading [particularly sprinklering] relative to rental income. [The 1989 estimate to upgrade a `70s Vancouver "special" was $2,500 for a 10 year phase-out, and $5,200 for a permanent suite. Recent contractor estimates for sprinklers and electrical work alone range from $3,100 to $7,750.] Related to the issue of cost, and making a review timely, the Provincial government is considering a program to provide financial support for renovations to suites;
- review of standards in other local municipalities which have begun allowing suites in the past 10 years; and
- investigation of reasons so many new houses with suites are installing them without permit.

An enforcement study could include:

- a review of enforcement experience elsewhere;
- initiation of more effective penalties;
- consideration of solutions to enforcement on the pre-1956 buildings; and
- development of a feasible strategy and resourcing for enforcement on those suites which remain illegal after any changes to standards.

Recommendation B is to report back in detail on the work program and timing for the review. Since staff in Permits & Licenses, Building By-law groups, and Planning are fully committed for 1999, the report back will occur in early 2000. The review would require research, including consultant studies; consultation with affected parties - home owners, builders, tenants - and their respective advocacy groups; Council consideration, and possibly a public hearing. Then any changes would need to be put into practice administratively. A preliminary estimate is that this could take until early 2002. See Figure 1.

Figure 1

Recommendation C is to withhold enforcement on phase-out suites for 3 years from the date of adoption of these Recommendations, while the review occurs. Appendix C outlines the details of this measure. It is reasonable to do this to provide phase-out suite owners with the opportunity to take advantage of any changes that result from the work. It does not worsen any conditions for the neighbourhoods in which they are located. Enforcement on the basis of safety and complaints would continue as now. In addition, the recommendation provides the ability for staff to enforce in other unusual circumstances.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

A letter summarizing the content of this report was sent to groups representing the interests of home owners and tenants in the areas where phase-out suites permits would expire before the 3-year period is up.

CONCLUSION

While the City's secondary suite program provides options and standards to allow secondary suites to be legal, a large number of them in both old and new buildings are continuing undeclared and illegal. The reasons appear to be a combination of city standards which owners or builders either cannot or do not wish to meet, with a low risk of enforcement on the part of the City. The 10-year phase-out suites, which have been upgraded to some degree, are beginning to expire. Closing them while not moving on the many undeclared illegal suites will be inequitable. The continuing illegality of so many suites also presents an issue for the future, in terms of having reasonable levels of safety and livability in this important housing component, ensuring some stability for tenants, and the city's ability to enforce standards of maintenance.

Given the City's original objectives with the suite program, as well as the adopted CityPlan directions to ensure housing variety and affordability, staff recommend that Council approve a two-fold approach: re-examining standards, which may lead to lowering of some barriers to legalization; while also finding ways to make enforcement more effective. In the meantime, staff propose allowing expiring phase-out suites to continue to exist for up to 3 years beyond their expiry date, in order to allow time to complete the research, consultation, adoption and implementation of any new regulations or measures. Enforcement on the basis of safety hazard and complaint would continue as now.

* * * * *


pe990708.htm

CURRENT STANDARDS FOR SECONDARY SUITES [summary]

PHASE-OUT SUITES

BUILDINGS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS

MAY BE

WITH THESE UPGRADES

Number

Parking

Ceiling Height

Time Limit

Building [Safety]

Electrical

Plumbing

Gas

3 or more additional units or

 

< 6"4"

1 year Phase-out

Waive requirements except:
-battery smoke alarms [hardwired if doing other electrical work]
-smoke separation between units [existing doors OK if in reasonable operating condition]
-self-closing devices on doors between the main dwelling and the suite

Waive requirement for new electrical service except:
-visual check for any obvious hazardous conditions throughout units
-check main panel for unsafe connections. oversize fuses etc
-existing bathroom receptacles must be Ground Fault Circuit Interruptor [GFCI] or razor transformer type

-unauthorized water supply piping may remain if material is approved ad there are no cross connections
-unauthorized drain waste and vents may remain if fixtures are properly trapped and there are no visible venting infractions
-if inspector suspects that fixtures may not drain to sanitary sewer, then system must be checked and corrected as necessary
-temperature and pressure relief valve from water tank must be piped to a safe location
-unapproved showers may remain providing the unit is trapped and there are not visible venting infractions. Inside finish must be waterproof and sanitary

No relaxations to Code

2 additional units or

2 spaces deficient
[i.e., no on-site parking]

min 6'4"

2 year Phase-out

1 additional unit or

1 space deficient

6'4" , but less than 6'8"

4 Year Phase-out

Waive requirements except:
-110 V hard-wired smoke alarm
-3/4 hour fire separation between units; or other option as provided for in a permanent suite [gypsum wallboard or lath and plaster in good conditions on ceiling and walls or equivalent]
-handrails and guardrails to comply with code
-self-closing devices on main doors between the main dwelling and the suite

-visual check for hazardous and unsafe conditions
-main service to meet code requirements for single family dwellings using maximum demand for any additional ranges and 100% rating of any additional appliances [i.e. dryer] and electric heating
-3 duplex outlines in living room area
-2 duplex outlets in each bedroom located on different walls
-2 grounded appliance circuits for kitchen counter area and minimum 2 duplex outlets
-fridge plug on separate grounded circuit outlet in bathroom and exterior outlets protected by a GFCI

1 additional unit

no deficiency
[i.e. 2 spaces]

6'8" but less than 6'10"

7 Year Phase-out

1 additional unit

no deficiency
[i.e. 2 spaces]

6'10" or more

10 Year Phase-out

PERMANENT SUITES in buildings built before April 1990 [when sprinklers became mandatory for all new single and two family dwellings].

1 additional unit

no deficiency
[i.e. 2 spaces]

6'10" or more

no limit

Per 10 year plus sprinklers on suite level; Moratorium suites: no sprinklers.

As for 10 year

As for 10 year

Full code

PERMANENT SUITES in buildings built after April 1990 [when sprinklers became mandatory for all new single and two family dwellings].

1 additional unit

no deficiency
[i.e. 2 spaces]

7'7"

no limit

Full code requirements, including full sprinklers

Full code requirements

Full code requirements

Full code

PHASE-OUT SUITES PERMITS BY AREA TO DECEMBER 31, 1998

AREA

PHASE-OUT PERMITS

10 YEAR EXPIRY DATE

Joyce Station Area

166

April 1, 1989

East Riley Park

206

February 1, 2000

Kitsilano

162

May 1, 2000

Kensington-Cedar Cottage

391

August 31, 2000

Sunset

317

February 1, 2001

Hastings-Sunrise/Grandview Woodland

298

August 15, 2001

West Riley Park

35

March 2, 2002

Renfrew-Collingwood

241

November 2, 2002

Point Grey

90

November 30, 203

Victoria-Fraserview

192

June 1, 2004

Shaughnessy/Marpole/Oakridge

39

March 1, 2005

Dunbar/Kerrisdale

80

August 1, 2005

Other Zones [CD-1]

19

various

OUTCOMES FOR EXPIRED PHASE-OUT SUITES: 1991-1998

 

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

TOTAL

Restored to 1 Family

2

42

31

56

12

21

57

25

246

Made Permanent

 

5

 

1

5

 

8

2

21

House Demolished

 

3

1

3

3

1

2

2

15

Action Pending*

   

1

4

15

3

27

31

81

TOTAL

2

50

33

64

35

25

94

60

363

DRAFT ADMINISTRATION BULLETIN

PHASE-OUT SUITES: WITHHOLDING OF ENFORCEMENT PENDING
STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT REVIEW

Authority: City Council Resolution

Effective: [date of resolution]

INTRODUCTION

On [date of resolution] City Council directed staff to review the upgrading standards and enforcement practices for secondary suites. At that time, they approved a resolution intended to allow 4, 7 and 10 year phase-out suites which have met current upgrading standards to remain open during the review.

IMPORTANT NOTES

Phase-out suites qualify for 4, 7 or 10 year terms depending on ceiling height and parking deficiency. They all are required to meet the same level of Building By-law upgrades. In choosing whether to apply for phase-out under 3(b) or 3(c) below, owners need to be aware that the ceiling height and parking requirements may or may not change as a result of the Standards and Enforcement Review, i.e., there is no guarantee that at the end of the review their particular suite will benefit. They need to bear this uncertainty in mind when they make their decisions on whether to invest in the required upgrades.

Enforcement will still occur in cases of safety hazard. There also may arise other circumstances which will result in enforcement and require the closure of a suite in the discretion of the Chief Licence Inspector.

DIRECTIVES

All of the following directives apply only to suites that qualified, or qualify, to be 4, 7 or 10 year phase-out suites, and which meet, or will meet, the 4/7/10 year standard of upgrading. There will be no withholding of enforcement for 1 and 2 year phase-out suites.

1. Phase-out suites with permits expiring between [date of resolution] and

2. Former phase-out suites, i.e., those whose permits

3. Illegal Suites dealt with during the Review

(a) In areas still within the original 10-year period from area notification:

(b) In areas where the original 10 year period from area notification has passed:

4. Business Licences and Water Rates


Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver