HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 41-05 REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 41-05
Date: December 1,2005
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Tim Moore
Chief Building Official
Subject:
Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act (Bill 124)
Enactment of new building by-law to implement legislated requirements
New fees for planning and building permit applications
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Report PD 41-05 of the Director, Planning & Development,
the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and the Chief Building Official be
received and that the by-law set out in Attachment #1 to Report PD 41-05 to
establish a new building permit process and fees be forwarded to City Council for
enactment; such by-law to be effective January 1, 2006.
That the By-law set out in Attachment #2 to Report PD 41-05, to amend the
City's General Fees and Charges By-law as it applies to planning application
fees, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; such by-law to be effective
January 1,2006.
That the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 41-05 to the Toronto and
Durham Homebuilders Associations and Urban Development Institutes.
Executive Summary: Bill 124 revises the Building Code Act and establishes new
building permit administration requirements. The required permit processes and staff
qualifications are substantially in place to meet the requirements of the legislation. A
new building by-law must be enacted to implement a number of provincially required
changes. It is important that Council be fully aware of the City's building permit
processing obligations under Bill 124, in order to respond to any inquiries which may
arise from the development community and the public.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1, 2005
Page 2
Bill 124 requires stricter management of building permit revenues. These rules mean
that the City will not be able to fund planning services or any other programs through
building permit fees. In order to ensure the City's fees comply with the new legislation
and take into account these future restrictions, C.N. Watson was retained to undertake
a comprehensive analysis of all Planning & Development service costs, fees and
legislative requirements. The undertaking of this consulting report was approved by
Council in the 2005 Current Budget. C.N. Watson recommends a small increase in
building permit fees to increase the amount of reserve funding and substantial increases
in some planning fees to bring planning revenues closer to actual costs.
Financial Implications: Financial matters associated with building permits and
planning applications are addressed in detail in the consolidated Development
Applications Approvals Process (DAAP) fee report prepared by C.N. Watson, which is
attached to this Report (see Attachment #6).
Buildinq Permit Fees and Costs
Bill 124 requires that permit fees not be used to support other programs. The analysis
conducted by C.N. Watson concluded that the City's current building permit fee rates
are generally appropriate when compared to the overall costs of administering permits
and enforcing the building code. A nominal increase in some building permit fees is set
out in the revised building by-law, as recommended by the consultant, in order to
establish the appropriate reserve fund authorized in the legislation. Some minor
administrative fees have also been prescribed to cover additional costs associated with
repeat plan examinations and inspections where design and construction does not
comply with the building code.
As a result of these amendments, building permit fees, during periods of normal volume,
will be sufficient to cover all current direct and indirect costs associated with
administering permits and enforcing the building code.
Planninq Application Fees and Costs
The analysis conducted by C.N. Watson concluded that the City's current planning
application fees are insufficient to support the costs of processing these applications.
As a consequence, a substantial portion of these costs are being borne from general
revenue sources, including building permit fees. Substantial increases in planning fees
are necessary in order to closely reflect the actual costs associated with processing
these applications. The fees for some minor application types are being maintained
substantially below processing costs.
As a result of these amendments, planning application fees, during periods of normal
volume, will be sufficient to cover a more substantial portion of the direct and indirect
costs associated with processing planning applications. Due to limited development
volumes, the increase in planning revenue in 2006 is expected to be modest.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 3
BILL
1.0
124 AND THE BUILDING BY-LAW:
Changes in Building Legislation
Significant changes have been made to the building regulatory system in Ontario
with the introduction of the Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002
(known as Bill 124) and associated amendments to the Ontario Building Code.
Most of the changes are scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2006 and
require that municipalities revise their building permit administration. Some of
these matters must be set out in a by-law. Pickering developed the by-law
attached to this Report in consultation with Whitby, Clarington and Oshawa, in
order to promote a more consistent building permit process across the Region. It
is now being adopted in most of the municipalities in Durham Region.
New requirements prescribed by the legislation are:
·
new service delivery options for municipalities through the use of private
inspection bodies, known as registered code agencies (RCAs);
· mandatory qualification for building officials (chief building officials, plan
examiners and inspectors);
· a Code of Conduct for building officials;
· mandatory qualification, registration and insurance for design firms and RCAs;
· mandatory use of a provincial building permit application form;
· a new list of applicable law that a chief building official must consider before
issuing permits;
· new rules governing building permit fees;
· mandatory timeframes for building permit decisions;
· mandatory notices and inspections at key construction stages;
· defined roles for every person involved in building design, approval and
construction;
· new measures to support innovation including binding Minister's interpretations
and Minister's rulings;
1.1 Consequences of the Legislation
The intent of Bill 124 is to improve public safety and increase efficiency in building
code enforcement. It arose principally out of concerns from the development
sector that some municipalities, in growth areas, were taking too long to issue
building permits and were collecting substantial building permit fees and using the
revenue to fund other municipal programs.
The qualification and conduct provisions of the legislation will result in increased
building code knowledge and greater diligence by building officials in enforcing the
Act, which is likely to result in increased public protection. This increased diligence in
enforcement, however, is unlikely to increase the efficiency of the building permit
process. Other aspects of the legislation add some additional complexity and
structure to the application process, which will also create efficiency challenges.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1, 2005
Page 4
In general, despite laudable goals and some beneficial aspects, Bill 124 is
unnecessarily broad in its reach and overbearing in its application, and may not
result in the achievement of all the intended goals.
The practical consequences of Bill 124 to the City are:
· increased application requirements, due to designer qualification requirements,
and new application forms, information and filing requirements;
· decreased flexibility in responding to permit demands, due to the requirement
that all plan review and inspections be conducted only by persons qualified and
registered with the Ministry in the specific category the application falls into;
· increased municipal responsibility in policing designer qualifications;
· increased need for detailed supervision and monitoring of permit applications in
order to meet provincially imposed time deadlines;
· increased demands on human resources, due to the need to efficiently recruit
qualified and registered staff to fill any necessary building positions;
· increased financial management and reporting requirements;
· elimination of the ability to use permit fees to fund planning services;
1.2 Registered Code Agencies
Bill 124 permits municipalities to contract out their building code enforcement
obligations to Registered Code Agencies (RCAs). RCAs must be qualified
according to building official standards and registered with the Ministry in order to
undertake plan reviews and inspections. RCAs are also required to obtain and
maintain insurance coverage and submit detailed quality management plans to the
Ministry. To retain the services of an RCA, the municipality must enter into a
written agreement with a qualified agency and formally appoint them.
RCAs are a necessary option for municipalities in areas subject to occasional
complex applications, where it would not be practical to retain full time qualified
staff, or where volume fluctuations necessitate private sector resources to deliver
permits within provincial timeframes. In most developed areas with qualified
municipal staff they may not be necessary. The pool of available Ministry qualified
RCAs is currently very limited or non-existent. It is not anticipated that the City will
need to retain RCAs at this time, however it is prudent to provide for this option
should circumstances change.
The by-law delegates the authority of entering into agreements and appointing
RCAs to the Chief Building Official, should it become necessary. Should this
option be considered in the future, notice would have to be given to CUPE 129.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 5
1.3 Mandatory Qualification of City Building Officials
Beginning January 1, 2006, the chief building official, deputy chief building official,
all plan examiners and inspectors must have obtained Provincial qualifications in
order to work in this capacity for the City. There are 12 categories of qualification
examination for inspectors in the new regulations. Staff have successfully become
qualified in all necessary technical and legal areas which apply to their current
responsibilities. There is, however, no longer any appointee for the position of
deputy Chief Building Official due to these qualification requirements. The
Director, Planning & Development and Supervisor, Development Control were
formerly appointed in this capacity. The 2006 budget submission by the Planning
& Development Department includes the position of Supervisor, Building Permits,
in part to fulfill this requirement.
Although all City building staff have successfully become qualified, complying with
these new mandatory requirements will create challenges in maintaining efficient
plan review and inspections over the longer term. Any new staff the City employs
must be Ministry registered in the qualification categories related to the type of
work they would be undertaking, prior to commencing work in this capacity. This
may make recruitment more challenging.
The new qualification rules will prevent any plan review or inspection being
undertaken except by appointed staff who possess the specific category of
Ministry qualification. This will create the need for greater redundancy in all
technical staff positions in order to ensure staff are qualified in all technical areas
are available at all times.
1.4 Code of Conduct
Bill 124 prescribes that Council must establish and enforce a Code of Conduct for
the Chief Building Official and inspectors. Ideally, a consistent code of conduct
province wide should have been established in the regulations.
A Code of Conduct for Pickering officials was adopted on July 1, 2005, and is
described in Schedule D of the by-law. It was previously communicated to Council
and is posted on the City's website in order to bring it to the attention of the public.
The code was developed collaboratively with other Durham municipalities and was
reviewed by Human Resources and CUPE prior to enactment.
The code requires all City building officials to identify and enforce compliance with
building code regulations consistently and independently of any influence by
interested parties. All affected staff have been informed in writing about the code.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 6
1,5
Mandatory Qualification, Registration and Insurance Requirements for
Designers
Bill 124 requires that designers of most projects be qualified and registered by the
Ministry. They must also obtain professional indemnity insurance coverage in the
amounts stipulated by the Code. On January 1, 2006, each designer must obtain
a Building Code Identification Number (BCIN) from the Ministry, and affix this
number, along with other information, to the building permit application and all
documents. There are some limited exemptions from designer qualification
requirements.
Homeowners who design their own home or an addition or accessory building are
exempt from qualification, however if any other person completes their drawings,
we will be obliged to enforce the qualification requirements. Applicants may be
frustrated at an inability to obtain permits if their designers are not qualified after
January 1, 2006. To assist designers in meeting their obligations, an information
package has been developed by Pickering (see Attachment #3).
1.6 Uniform Permit Application Form and Orders
Applicants seeking a permit to construct, renovate or demolish a building must use
the permit application form (see Attachment fCA) mandated by the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing. The Ministry has also prescribed order forms to be
issued in enforcement. The provincial forms are generally inferior to existing
municipal documents and require an applicant to complete a minimum of three
pages, as compared to the City's former one page document.
In addition, completion of additional information and schedules attached to the
application form will be obligatory for most applicants. The complexity of the form
and the requirement that it be complete for it to be accepted, will increase the
perception of bureaucracy, pose customer service challenges, and place additional
demands on counter staff.
1.7 Applicable Law
Chief building officials are responsible for ensuring specific requirements set out in
various Federal and Provincial legislation are met as a prerequisite to issuing any
building permit. A comprehensive listing of laws that prescribe standards related
to the construction or demolition of a building have been established that require
compliance before a permit can be issued.
The new listing will serve to clarify what laws apply to building permits and
establish better ground rules. It may still be difficult however for most applicants to
know which laws apply and how to go about obtaining approvals. To assist
applicants in this respect, an applicable law checklist has been developed by
Pickering (see Attachment #5).
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 7
1.8 Building Permit Fees
Bill 124 limits building permit fees to only an amount sufficient to cover the cost of
administering building permits and enforcing the building code. In order to
establish the appropriate fees, a full review of direct and indirect costs relating to
the administration and enforcement of the Ontario Building Code was undertaken
as part of a comprehensive review of all Planning & Development fees.
The resulting permit fees are established in Schedule B to the by-law and have
been adjusted in selected categories to accommodate a 6% overall increase as
recommended by C.N. Watson. Pickering's building permit fee rates had
remained unchanged since 1995.
BUILDING PERMIT FEE COMPARISON - Sim2
= .,9,o c E >, ~ o ,.- ,-.
._ ,- ~'~ ~ ~ o
.~ o o ~ ~: O ~ ....
Building Type
Detached House 10.29 12.60 9.50 7.62 8.50 8.50 7.75 9.12 9.00 8.50
Townhouses 10.29 12.60 g.50 9.14 8.50 6.78 7.75 9.12 9.00 8.50
Apartment Buildings 9.27 19.95 8.35 6.71 7.00 8.18 7.25 9.72 9.00 7.00
School 14.12 21.00 13.75 11.19 13.50 14.10 13.20 16.71 12.00 12.00
Offiae Building 11.87 16.60 11.60 9.31 10.50 11.73 9.80 11.09 10.00 10.00
Retail Store 9.5O 14.10 10.00 7.94 6.50 10.01 8.97 11.85 10.00 9.00
Industrial Building 6.50 11.55 8.10 6.50 5.50 5.81 4.95 6.99 5.50 5.50
Deck (Flat Fee) $100 $84 $5o $6o $5o $75 $5o $85 $50 $5o
Bill 124 also requires municipalities to prepare an annual report outlining building
permit revenues and the costs of enforcing the Building Code Act and the Building
Code, including:
· total fees collected in the previous fiscal period;
· the direct costs of servicing building permits and enforcing the Building Code
Act and the Building Code;
· the associated indirect costs;
· the status of the reserve fund(s), if any are established;
This report will be presented to Council early in 2007. Also a public meeting must
be held prior to implementing any future change to the fees.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 8
1.9 Mandatory Permit Review Timeframes
The amended Building Code introduces timeframes within which the chief building
official must render a decision about whether to issue a building permit. If a permit
cannot be issued, the chief building official is required to advise the applicant, in
writing, of all the reasons. These timeframes vary based on the type of building
permit applied for and will be extremely challenging to meet.
Mandatory Timeframes for Buildinq Permit Decisions
Type of Building
Small homeowner projects
Maximum time allowed
10 business days
Detached, semi-detached, townhouses 10 business days
Tenant improvements 15-20 business days
Small buildings 15 business days
Large buildings 20 business days
Complex buildings 30 business days
If the chief building official fails to provide a decision regarding the issuance of a
permit or fails to provide all the reasons for the refusal within the stipulated
timeframes, the applicant can refer the matter to the Building Code Commission,
who will review the matter within five business days of receiving notification. It is
unclear yet what the Commission will do to compel the chief building official to act
in such cases. This process may draw municipal resources away from the efficient
review of applications.
It is anticipated that occasional delays will occur in providing decisions on building
permits during periods of unusual volume, unplanned staff absences and vacation
periods. Notwithstanding this aspect of the legislation, it would not be in the
public's interest to issue permits indiscriminately simply to comply with the time
limits. An increased counter screening process is being developed in order to
maximize the success rate for applications. Some increase in waiting time at the
counter and frustration with additional submission requirements may result.
In order to continue our current practice of reviewing building permits concurrently
with other approvals, applications will be divided into two streams, on the basis of
completion.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1, 2005
Page 9
Complete applications, where all documents are provided and all applicable
laws are fully complied with. These applications will be monitored for
compliance with provincial timeframes, and given review priority.
Incomplete applications, where all required documents have not been
submitted and/or applicable laws are not fully complied with. These
applications will continue to be accepted in some instances provided the
applicant waives the mandated timeframe on a written form as required by the
building code. Reviews of incomplete applications will be subject to
resources being available.
1.10 Mandatory Notifications, Inspections And Inspection Timeframes
The new legislation introduces time restrictions for undertaking building
inspections, following mandatory notifications by permit holders. The regulation
specifies additional inspections over and above the municipality's current
inspections program.
PLANNING APPLICATION FEES:
2.0
The fees for processing planning applications were also reviewed in conjunction
with the required review of building permit fees under Bill 124. It was considered
most appropriate to undertake a broad review of all fees charged in the
Development Applications Approvals Process (DAAP).
C.N. Watson and Associates worked with staff to review the full approval process
for all development application types, charting specific time allocations for all City
staff involved in review (see Attachment #6). The study identified the full cost
incurred by the City to process each type of planning application and concluded
that current planning application fees fall significantly short of full cost recovery.
Staff reviewed the full cost recovery fees identified by C.N. Watson in light of fees
charged by other municipalities in Durham Region and the GTA, many of which
have recently completed a DAAP user fees review. Implications to the
development industry and City residents of applying full cost recovery fees on all
applications was also considered. The following conclusions were reached
through this analysis and are reflected in the recommended revised fees schedule:
· discounts are appropriate in some application categories for economic incentive
reasons and to encourage the public to seek compliance;
· significant discounts are appropriate in application categories that commonly
involve residents (minor variances for existing buildings and accessory
structures), and existing businesses (minor site plan revisions/rezonings);
· full cost recovery is most appropriate in application categories that deal with
new lot creation (draft plans of subdivision/condominium);
The recommended revised fees schedule for planning applications is included as
Attachment #2 to this report.
Report PD 41-05
Subject: Bill 124 and Planning Application Fees
Date: December 1,2005
Page 10
A meeting was conducted with Durham and Toronto area development industry
representatives on November 24, 2005, in order to provide them with information
about the C.N. Watson report, and the City's proposed new fee schedules. A
notice has also been placed in the News Advertiser respecting this report being
considered at Executive Committee and Council.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Draft Building By-law
Draft Planning Fee By-law
Designer Guide
Provincial Application Form
Applicable Law Checklist
C.N. Watson DAAP Report
Prepared By:
Chief Building Official
Approved / Endorsed By:
Ne (~mdi Pm.R'p p
Director, Plan-h'i~g & Development
Lynda'Taylor, MCIP,/RPP
Manager, Development Review
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
TM:Id
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering Ci, ty Council ,,
~a:J. Qu~n, Chi~Administ~Officer'
ATTACHMENT
REPORI ~ PD
BY.LAW ~~
Being a by-law to provide for the administration and
enforcement of the Building Code Act 1992 within the
City of Pickering
WHEREAS Subsection 3(1) of the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, chapter 23,
provides that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering is responsible for the
enforcement of the Building Code Act, 1992 within the City of Pickering; and
WHEREAS Subsection 3(2) of the Building Code Act, 1992 requires that the Council shall
appoint a chief building official and such inspectors as are necessary for the enforcement
of the Building Code Act, 1992 within the City of Pickering; and
WHEREAS Section 7 of the Building Code Act, 1992 authorizes the Council of a
municipality to pass certain By-laws prescribing classes of permits, permit application
documents, fees, inspections and other related matters.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
This By-law may be cited as the Building By-law.
DEFINITIONS
In this By-law,
(1) "Act" means the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, chapter 23;
(2) "As Constructed Plans" shall mean as constructed plans as defined in the
building code;
(3) "Applicant" shall mean a person who applies for a permit and includes any
person authorized by an owner to apply for a permit on the owner's behalf;
(4) "Architecr' shall mean a holder of a license, a certificate of practice, or a
temporary license under the Architect's Act as defined in the Building Code;
(5) "Building" shall mean a building as defined in Subsection 1 (1) of the Act;
(6) "Buildinq Code" means the regulations made under Section 34 of the Act;
(7) "Chief Buildinq Official" shall mean the person appointed by the Council as
the chief building official for the purpose of enforcement of the Act;
(8) "Construction Value" shall mean the value prescribed by the chief building
official to represent the total value of all work, services and material
associated with the construction for which a permit is applied;
(9) "Council" shall mean the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering;
(10) "Deficient Permit" shall mean a permit in respect of which,
(i) an inspection notice or order to comply has been issued by an
inspector or,
(11)
~TTAC~UErCr~_ / _1'0
- 2- REPORT # PD__ ,-/'/-cO,~
(ii) an inspection required ~.~ the building code or this By-law has not
been arranged, &~l¢~
and six months o~~rlapsed after the date the notice was issued or
the inspection wa~i~i~§;
"Deputy Chief Bu~inq Official" shall mean the person appointed by the
Council as the deputy chief building official for the purpose of enforcement of
the Act;
(12) "Equivalent" shall mean equivalent materials, systems or designs proposed
by an applicant pursuant to Section 9 of the Act;
(13) "Holiday" shall mean days when the offices of the City of Pickering are not
open for transaction of business with the public;
(14) "Inspector" shall mean an inspector listed in Schedule A;
(15)
"Owner" shall mean the registered owner of the land upon which is located,
or will be located, the building or part thereof for which an application for a
permit is, or has been made;
(16)
"Permit" shall mean permission or authorization given, in writing, by the chief
building official,
(i)
(ii)
to perform work regulated by the Act or the building code or both,
to change the use of a building or part of a building as regulated by
the Act or the building code or both, or
to occupy a building or a part thereof;
(17) "Permit Holder" shall mean an owner to whom a permit has been issued, or
where a permit has been transferred, the transferee;
(18) "Professional Enqineer" shall mean a person who holds a licence or a
temporary licence under the Professional Engineer's Act; and
(19) "Registered Code A.qency" shall mean a person or an entity that has the
qualifications and meets the requirements set out in the Act.
Any word or term not defined in this By-law shall have the meaning ascribed to it in
the Act or the building code.
3. APPOINTMENTS
Each person whose name is set out in Column 2 of Schedule A is hereby appointed
to the position set out beside that person's name in Column 1 thereof.
CODE OF CONDUCT FOR BUILDING OFFICIALS
Each person listed in Schedule A shall be governed by the Code of Conduct set out in
Schedule D, with respect to exercising powers and performing duties under the Act.
5. CLASSES OF PERMITS
Classes of permits with respect to the construction, demolition, change of use and
occupancy of buildings and permit fees shall be as set out in Schedule B.
REQUIREMENTS FOR FILING PF.R PPLICATIONS
(1) Complete ApplicatioE ~ ~f
(a) To obtain a i~J~t,~'an applicant shall file a complete application on the
form availabl~jl~rom the chief building official, or from the Province of
Ontario, together with the applicable requirements set out in
Subsections (2) to (8).
(2)
(b)
All documents and drawings accompanying an application shall be
coordinated with each other and shall be consistent with the
description of the proposed work.
Building Permits
(a)
Every application for a building permit under Subsection 8(1) of the
Act shall,
(i)
identify and describe in detail the work to be done and the
existing and proposed use and occupancy of the building, or
part thereof, for which the application for a permit is made;
(ii)
be accompanied by the plans, specifications, documents and
other information prescribed in Section 7 and Schedule C; and
be accompanied by the appropriate fee calculated in
accordance with Schedule B.
(3) Demolition Permits
(a)
Every application for a demolition permit under Subsection 8(1) of the
Act shall,
(i)
identify and describe in detail the work to be done and the
existing use and occupancy of the building, or part thereof, for
which the application for a permit is made, and the proposed
use and occupancy of that part of the building, if any, that will
remain upon completion of the demolition;
(ii)
be accompanied by the plans, specifications, documents and
other information prescribed in Section 7 and Schedule C;
(iii) be accompanied by the appropriate fee calculated in
accordance with Schedule B; and
(iv) be accompanied by confirmation that,
A
arrangements have been made with the proper
authorities for the safe and complete disconnection of all
existing water, sewer, gas, electric, telephone and other
utilities; and
(4)
B the owner will comply with the City's property standards
by-law at the completion of demolition.
Conditional Building Permits
(a) Every application for a conditional building permit under Subsection 8(3)
of the Act shall,
(i)
comply with the requirements set out in Subsection 6(3) in this
By-law; and
(ii) be accompanied by,
A
B
a writt~s~l~en[ from the applicant explaining why the
is ~:~ i§sued;
a written acknowledgement from the applicant of the
necessary approvals which must be obtained in respect
of the proposed construction and the time period in
which such approvals shall be obtained by the applicant;
C
a written agreement, in a form provided by the chief
building official, executed by the applicant, the owner
and such other necessary persons the chief building
official determines for the purposes set out in clause
8(3)(c) of the Act; and
(5)
D the conditional permit fee in accordance with Schedule B.
(b)
The chief building official is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of
The Corporation of the City of Pickering the written agreement
referred to in clause 6(5)(b)(iii) as part of the conditional building
permit application.
Change of Use Permits
(a)
Every application for a change of use permit under Subsection 10(1)
of the Act shall,
(i)
identify and describe in detail the existing and proposed use
and occupancy of the building, or part thereof, for which the
application for a permit is made;
(ii)
be accompanied by plans and specifications which show the
current and proposed occupancy of all parts of the building and
which contain sufficient information to establish compliance
with the building code, including, but not necessarily limited to,
floor plans and details of wall, ceiling and roof assemblies
identifying existing fire resistance ratings and load bearing
capacities;
be accompanied by the appropriate fee in accordance with
Schedule B; and
(iv)
be accompanied by the completed documents prescribed in
Schedule C.
(6) Occupancy Permits for Unfinished Buildings
(a)
Every application for authorization to occupy an unfinished building
under Section 2.4.3 of the building code shall,
(i)
identify and describe in detail the occupancy, the date of such
occupancy, and the building or part thereof for which the
application for a permit is made;
(ii)
be accompanied by plans which show the areas of the
proposed occupancy; and
(iii) be accompanied by the appropriate fee in accordance with
Schedule B.
(1) Every applicant s~'"ll~ltlt~l!~llufficient plans, specifications, documents and
other information (~ ~,1:~ the chief building official to determine whether the
proposed buildin¢~r~tiuction, demolition or change of use will contravene
the Act, the buildin~;~:ode or any other applicable law.
(2)
The chief building official shall determine the plans, specifications,
documents and other information required to be submitted with an application
in order to deem it complete according to sentence 2.4.1.1B.(5) of the
building code having regard for:
(a) the scope of the proposed work;
(b)
the requirements of the building code, the Act and other applicable
law; and
(c) the requirements of this Section and Schedule C.
(3)
Plans, specifications, documents and other information shall be submitted in
a permanent medium upon paper or other suitable and durable material and
shall contain text that is legible and drawings that are legible, complete, fully
dimensioned and to scale.
(4) Site plans submitted by an applicant shall,
(a)
be certified by the Planning & Development Department of the City of
Pickering as being in conformity with by-laws passed under Sections
34 and 41 of the Planning Act; and
(b)
be referenced to a current plan of survey prepared and certified by an
Ontario Land Surveyor, and a copy of the survey shall accompany the
site plan submission, except where the chief building official waives
the requirement to do so.
(5)
On the completion of the foundation for a detached, semi-detached, triplex,
fourplex or townhouse dwelling, the chief building official may require
submission of a survey prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor indicating the
location and elevation of the top of the foundation wall, prior to a framing
inspection being undertaken.
(6)
On the completion of the construction of a building, or part of a building, the
chief building official may require submission of a set of plans of the building or
part of a building, as constructed, together with a plan of survey prepared and
certified by an Ontario Land Surveyor showing the location of the building.
AUTHORIZATION OF EQUIVALENTS
(1)
Where approval for an equivalent material, system or building design under
Section 9 of the Act is proposed in either an application for a permit, or in a
material change to a plan, specification, document or other information on
the basis of which a permit is issued, the applicant shall submit,
(a) a completed "Equivalent Application Form" as described in Schedule C;
(b)
a description of the proposed location(s) the equivalent is proposed to
be installed;
(c)
a description of the proposed material, system or building design for
which authorization is sought;
(d) a description of all applicable provisions of the building code in
contravention;
-6-
o
(2)
(3)
(e) supporting documentation demonstrating that the proposed material,
system or building design W~I provide the level of performance
required by the building co~l,~d
(f) payment of the req~lt~¢ ,~as~lc~,et out in Schedule B.
The chief building off~e~i~ered'~Z~ code a .................
~'"~.~' ~1~:~' ~,,~,y ,,~¢y duuept or rejec[ any
proposed equivalents'~,~r~d?.~'~y impose conditions or limitation on their use.
Equivalents that are accepted under this section shall be applicable only to
the location described in the application, and are not transferable to any
other building permit.
INCOMPLETE PERMIT APPLICATION,'::;
(1)
(2)
(3)
An application shall be deemed not to be complete according to sentence
2.4.1.1.B(5) of the building code where any of the applicable requirements of
Section 6 have not been complied with.
Except as provided in Subsection 9(3), an application deemed to be
incomplete shall not be accepted by the chief building official.
The chief building official may accept an incomplete application where the
applicant acknowledges, in writing, that the application is incomplete and
waives the time period prescribed in the building code within which a permit
must be issued or refused.
(4)
Where an applicant declares that an application is complete in all respects
and complies with the Act, the building code and applicable law, the chief
building official shall issue or refuse to issue a permit within the time period
prescribed in the building code.
(5)
Where an applicant declares that an application is complete in all respects,
but the application is determined to be incomplete or does not comply with
the Act, the building code or applicable law, an additional fee as prescribed in
Schedule B shall be applied to the re-examination of documents required to
be submitted by an applicant.
10. ABANDONED PERMIT APPLICATIONS
(1)
An application for a permit shall be deemed to have been abandoned by the
applicant where,
(a)
the application is incomplete according to Section 9 and remains
incomplete six months after it was submitted;
(b)
six months have elapsed after the applicant was notified that the
proposed building, construction, demolition or change of use will not
comply with the Act or the building code or will contravene any other
applicable law; or
(c)
the application is substantially complete, and six months have elapsed
from the date upon which the applicant was notified that a permit was
available to be issued.
(2)
Where an application is deemed abandoned, all submitted plans,
specifications and documents shall be disposed of, or upon written request
from the applicant, returned to the applicant.
11. REVISION TO PERMITS
Should a permit holder wish to make any material change to any plan, specification,
document or other information on the basis of which the permit was issued, the
permit holder shall file an application for a revision to the permit which describes the
material changes, and shall pay the fee set out in Schedule B.
-7-
12. TRANSFER OF PERMITS
(1)
(2)
If the owner of the land changes after a permit has been issued, the permit
may be transferred to the new ow~ir (the "transferee") of the lands where an
application is filed with the City~lt~iting, in accordance with this section.
Every application for th a' of~)ermit shall
(a) include a w ent from the current permit holder authorizing
the transfer ~,,.;~ ~ermit to the transferee;
(b) include proof of ownership of the lands by the transferee satisfactory
to the chief building official;
(c)
confirm that the work to be done and the existing and proposed use
and occupancy of the building or part thereof, for which the application
for the transfer of the permit is made, is the same as that identified
and described on the application of the permit;
(d)
state the name, address, telephone number of the proposed
transferee;
(e)
state the name, address, telephone number and facsimile number of
the proposed architect and/or professional engineer, and their building
code qualifications, where they are different from those identified in
the application for the permit, and a written confirmation from the
architect and/or professional engineer(s), that they have been retained
to undertake general review of the construction or demolition where
required under the building code;
(f)
include, where the proposed transferee is a builder as defined in the
Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act, the proposed transferee's
registration number under that Act;
(g)
be accompanied by the appropriate fee in accordance with Schedule B;
and
(h)
be signed by the proposed transferee who shall certify as to the truth
of the contents of the application.
(3)
Upon the issuance of transfer of a permit to the transferee, the transferee
shall be deemed to be the permit holder and the original permit holder shall
have no further rights or obligations under the permit save and except for any
obligations set out in any agreements entered into for the purposes of clause
8(3)(c) of the Act.
13. REVOCATION OF PERMITS
(1)
Prior to revoking a permit, the chief building official shall give written notice of
an intention to revoke the permit to the permit holder at the permit holder's
address shown on the application or to such other address as the permit
holder has provided to the City for that purpose.
(2)
Following issuance of the notice described in Subsection 13(1), the permit
may be revoked immediately or after a period prescribed by the chief building
official, and all submitted plans, specifications, documents and other
information may be disposed of or, upon written request from the permit
holder, returned to the permit holder.
(3)
Notice under Subsection 13(1) shall be given either personally or by
registered mail, and where notice is by registered mail, it shall be deemed to
have been given on the fifth day after the day of mailing.
14.
(1)FEES AND REFUN D~S O._[.F FEES.~.
Application Fees ~, ~,~,~ ~
(a) A fee sh~l~i~id with every permit application, calculated in
accordanc~v~t§ Schedule B and the fee shall be due and payable, in
full, upon t~C~ubmission of the application for a permit.
(b) The minimum fee payable on any application shall be $50.00.
(c)
Where the amount of a fee to be paid as part of a permit application is
based, upon the building category, floor area and/or value of the
proposed construction, the chief building official, or a person
designated by the chief building official, shall determine the
appropriate building category, floor area and/or value, and that
determination shall be final.
(d)
Where an application for a permit is subject to additional user fees
prescribed by the City, the fees so prescribed shall be paid in addition
to the fees set out in Schedule B.
(2) Plan Re-examination Fees
(a)
Where an applicant substantially revises proposed materials, systems
or a building design after examination of a previous submission has
already been undertaken, a re-examination fee shall apply as set out
in Schedule B.
(3) Additional Inspection Fees
(4)
(a)
An additional inspection fee as set out in Schedule B shall apply and
shall be paid prior to each inspection being undertaken on any
building where,
(i)
any of the prescribed notice requirements under the building
code or the additional notices required under this By~law have
not been complied with by a permit holder;
(ii)
more than two inspections are required due to construction
being incomplete or not in compliance with the building code;
a building is occupied before the notice required under Section
11 of the Act was given to the chief building official; or
(iv)
Fee Refunds
an inspection is requested to confirm that outstanding items
have been completed or corrected in respect of a deficient
permit.
(a) If requested, in writing, by an applicant or permit holder, where,
(i) an applicant withdraws, in writing, an application for a permit;
(ii) an application is deemed to have been abandoned in
accordance with Section 10;
(iii) the chief building official refuses to issue a permit for which an
application has been made; or
(iv) the chief building official revokes a permit after it has been
issued,
-9-
.-, ~ ACHMENT # / TO
(b)
the chief building official sha~alculate the portion of any fee paid that
may be refunded and atone the payment thereof based upon the
functions undertaken ~1~ (~, in accordance with ~ubsections 14(8)
to 14(13). ¢~'~:: ~
E~ghty-flve p~ ~t~'r¢5 Yo) of the perm t fee paid in accordance with
Schedule B ~!.s,¢~'~ be refunded if only application administrative
functions havcCbeen performed.
(c)
Fifty per cent (50%) of the permit fee paid in accordance with
Schedule B shall be refunded if,
(d)
(e)
(i)
the functions described in Subsection 14(8) and all or part of
plan review functions have been performed; and
(ii) the permit has not been issued.
Twenty-five per cent (25%) of the fee paid in accordance with
Schedule B shall be refunded if the permit has been issued.
Notwithstanding Subsections 14(7) to 14(10) above, no refund of any
portion of the permit fee paid in accordance with Schedule B shall be
made if any construction or demolition has commenced.
(f)
No refund shall be payable where the amount calculated in
accordance with this Section is less than $50.00.
(g)
Any amount authorized by the chief building official to be refunded
shall be paid to the person named on the fee receipt issued by the
City upon original payment of the fee, unless that person directs, in
writing, that it be refunded to another person.
15. REGISTERED CODE AGENCIES
Pursuant to Subsection 4.1(3) of the Act and Section 2.22 of the building code, the
chief building official is authorized to enter into service agreements with registered
code agencies and appoint them to perform one or more of the specified functions
described in Section 15.15 of the Act.
16. FENCES AT CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION SITE,~
(1)
Where, in the opinion of the chief building official or an inspector, a
construction or demolition site presents a hazard to the public, the chief
building official or inspector may require the owner to erect such fences as
the chief building official or inspector deems appropriate to the
circumstances.
(2)
In considering the hazard presented by the construction or demolition site,
the necessity for fences and the height and characteristics of such fences,
the chief building official or inspector shall have regard for,
(a) the proximity of the building site to other occupied buildings;
(b)
the proximity of the construction or demolition site to lands accessible
to the public;
(c)
the hazards presented by the construction or demolition activities and
materials;
(d) the feasibility and effectiveness of site fences; and
(e) the duration of the hazard.
(3)
-10-
4'~ACHMENf #, / fO
Every fence required by this section~hall,
be erected so as to full~,ose all areas of the site which present a
(a) hazard; .4 ~°~¢¢ ~
(b) create a coUtUrier and be sufficient to
deter
unauthorized
ent~; ~ ~
(C) have a hei~} not less that 1.2 metres above ~rade at any point,
unloss the chio[ builOin~ official or inspector dotormines that a ~reator
minimum hoi~ht is necessa~;
(d)
if constructed of plastic mesh, snow fencing or other similar materials,
be securely fastened at 200mm c.c. to vertical posts not more than 2.4
metres apart, and to horizontal members or a minimum 11 gauge
cable at the top and bottom; and
(e) be maintained in a vertical plane and in good repair.
17. INSPECTION NOTICES
(1)
The permit holder shall also give notice to the chief building official or
registered code agency of the following stages of construction in addition to
the notices prescribed by the building code:
(a) commencement of construction of,
(i) masonry fireplaces and masonry chimneys;
(ii) factory-built fireplaces and allied chimneys; or
(iii) stoves, ranges, space heaters and add-on furnaces using solid
fuels and allied chimneys;
(b) substantial completion of interior finishes; and/or
(c)
substantial completion of heating, ventilating, air-conditioning and air-
contaminant extraction equipment.
(2)
A notice required to be given by a permit holder to the chief building official or
registered code agency pursuant to Subsection 2.4.5 of the building code
shall be given to the chief building official or registered code agency at least
two days in advance of the construction stage in which notice is being given.
(3)
For the purpose of Subsection 17(2), the term "day" means any Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday other than a holiday.
(4)
A notice given to the chief building official pursuant to Subsection 2.4.5 of the
building code shall be given in writing to either the chief building official, an
inspector or registered code agency and if given to an inspector in
accordance with this Section, shall be deemed to have been given to the
chief building official.
(5)
A notice given to the chief building official or registered code agency
pursuant to Subsection 2.4.5 of the building code and this Section shall not
be effective until actually received by the chief building official, inspector or
registered code agency as the case may be.
18. SEVERABILITY
Should any provision of this By-law be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction
to be invalid it shall not affect the validity of this By-law as a whole or any other part
thereof, other than the provision declared to be invalid.
-11 -
19. INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
(1) Schedules A, B, C and D attached shall form part of this By-law.
(2)
Unless otherwise specified, references in this By-law to Sections,
Subsections and Schedules are references to Sections, Subsections and
Schedules in this By-law.
(3) By-law 4647/95 is hereby repealed.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of
December 2005.
David Ryan, Ma~r~¢1
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
SCHEDULE A
APPOINTMENTS
iItem1 i Column1 ~ Column2
chief building official ~" ~Timothy Moor~
~7 '~ deputy chief building off c a ~;~ ~ I~ ....
I 3. inspector ~ ;:~'~ ~ Toby H~I
i 4. inspector ~t.~,~,;~ ~'~' ~ Robe~ Lalonde
~ 5. inspector ;~ :,~ ~,~ _~ AlbeA AI~
'~. inspector ~ :~ ' !~
17. ~ inspector ?'
i Taylor Young
j-~. inspector Paul Nishikawa
~ inspector Andr2s SzOnyi
,
10. i inspector I Matthew Seward
11. i inspector t Brian Holmes
-12-
'Item
1.
Demolition Permit
; Conditional Building Permit ;!::it;:' 6(5)
~ 4. , Change of Use Permit 6(7) $200
i 5. Occupancy Permit for 6(8) 100
Unfinished Building
SCHEDULE B - PART A -i~'. ?[17,4) ~,.,!~ '"~,~
CLASSES OF PEREIlTS AND BEES PAYABLE
Class of Permit ~-~re~---~c '.L~ Fee Payable
Building Permit ~ i Sle Part B
$10 for each 100 square metres of floor area
or part thereof, minimum $50
Applicable Building Permit Fee payable plus
$1000
OTHER FEES
Item I Type of Fee
Equivalent Authorization
2. found to be incomplete
!3.
[4.
t5. (a) i
5. (b)
6.
Reference
Fee Payable
~1. 8 $100.00
Resubmission of application 9(5) 25% of application fee
Revision to permit 11 $50.00
Transfer of permit 12 $50.00
Re-examination I 14(5)
- Change in house model
Re-examination
- other than 5(a) i 14(5)
Additional Inspection ¢ 14(6)
$300 plus the fee prescribed in Part B as a
result of any additional area
10% of applicable permit fee to a maximum of
$1000.00
$100.00
-13-
SCHEDULE B-PART B
FEES PAYABLE FOR BUILDING PERMITS
Item
New Buildings and Additions
Assembly Occupancies
Institutional Occupancies
Residential Occupancies[r ~ ~'?'~
apartment buildings, h~,~e)¢ s,
detached, semi-detach~/~r~;d townhouse
dwellings, & other resicC'~ntial occupancies
Business and Personal Service Occupancies
Mercantile Occupancies
single storey buildings
multiple storey buildings
Industrial Occupancies
farm buildings, unserviced storage buildings,
unfinished basements
parking garages
other industrial buildings
Fee Payable
Minor Residential Structures and Alterations,
including
decks, gazebos (each)
incidental partitioning of a basement
fireplace, wood stove (each)
garage, carport, storage shed (each 50m2)
water and sewer connection
other similar minor projects associated with
a residential use
$12.00 for each square meter of floor area or
)art thereof.
$14.00 for each square metre of floor area or
)art thereof.
$9.00 for each square metre of floor area or
part thereof.
$8.00 for each square metre of floor area or
part thereof.
10.00 for each square metre of floor area or
)art thereof.
$3.00 for each square metre of floor area or
part thereof.
$4,00 for each square metre of floor area or
part thereof.
$5.50 for each square metre of floor area or
)art thereof.
Alterations, Repairs and Other Structures
Interior Partitioning and Finishing, inciuding $2.00 for each square metre of floor area or
tenant a/terations part thereof.
apartment in houses
$5O.OO
with a non-residential use
Alterations, buildings and structures
not provided for in Items 1 to 8
Minor Non-Residential Structures, including
school portables (each)
temporary prefabricated trailers (each)
temporary tent (each)
other similar minor structures associated
~ 100.00
$10.00 for each $1,000 of construction value or
)art thereof.
For the proper interpretation and application of this Schedule, see Notes following
-14-
SCHEDULE B - Part B
FEES PAYABLE FOR BUILDING PERMITS
Notes: ~!¢,~ ~
1. The following guidelines for calcul~n~i~¢'~r~as and fees apply to the specific building types and
construction indicated. In order to ~e~i~ the applicable occupancy, recourse shall be had to the
building code and its appendices. ;E:¢ '
Floor area shall be measured to the outer face of exterior walls and to the centerline of party walls or
demising walls. No deductions shall be made for openings within the floor area (e.g., stairs and stair
openings, ducts, elevators, escalators). Floor area shall include all habitable areas, including
mezzanines, finished attics and enclosed balconies.
(a) Assembly Occupancies:
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
The "Assembly Occupancies" rate shall apply to the total floor area of floors, which are
principally of assembly use. Other rates shall be applied to other floors based on the principal
use of the total floor area.
Institutional Occupancies:
The "Institutional Occupancies" rate shall apply to the floor areas of floors, which are principally
of institutional use. Other rates shall be applied to other floors based on the principal use of the
total floor area.
Residential Occupancies:
For detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings, the floor areas of unfinished
basements, attached garages, porches and decks shall not be included in the area
calculations, but the fee is inclusive of these areas.
For the other residential occupancies, the "Residential Occupancies" rate shall apply to the
floor areas of floors, which are principally of residential use. Other rates shall be applied to
other floors based on the principal use of the total floor area.
Business and Personal Services Occupancies:
The applicable "shell" rate shall be applied to the floor areas of a speculative structure, where
the only finished floor areas are to be the common areas (e.g., lobby, corridors, washrooms).
The "Interior Partitioning and Finishing" rate shall be applied where finished floor areas are to
be provided in other than common areas. Other rates shall be applied to other floors based on
the principal use of the total floor area.
Mercantile Occupancies:
The "Mercantile Occupancies" rate shall be applied to the floor areas of a speculative structure,
where the only finished floor areas are to be the common areas (e.g., lobby, corridors,
washrooms). The "Interior Partitioning and Finishing" rate shall be applied where finished floor
areas are to be provided in other than common areas. Other rates shall be applied to other
floors based on the principal use of the total floor area.
Industrial Occupancies:
Each "Industrial Occupancies" rate includes incidental finished office space to a maximum of
10% of the total floor area. The "Interior Partitioning and Finishing" rate shall be applied where
additional finished space is provided. Other rates shall be applied to other floors based on the
principal use of the total floor area.
3. "Construction value", as used in Item 9 of Schedule B - Part B, means the value of the proposed
construction as determined by the chief building official, whose determination of that value shall be final.
-15-
Row
1la)
1lb)
SCHEDULE C - PART A
DOCUMENTS & DRA'¢,;:NGS REQUIRED FOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Class of Permit
Building Permit
Residential
Detached houses
Semi-detached houses
Triplexes
Fourplexes
Townhouses
Building Permit
Residential as in 1la)
Alterations
Additions
Accessory Buildings
Building Permit
J~cuments and Drawings Required
Co .,a ce Cheo , t
.... ¢~ ~ ~ckn0wledgement of incomplete application
~' e Regional Municipality of Durham Residential
Development Charges Information Form
f School Boards Education Development Charge
Information Form
g TARION Registration Form
h Regional Connection Application for Water/Sewer
Drawings
a Approved Site Plan
b Approved Grading Plan
c Architectural Drawings
d Structural Drawings
e HVAC Drawings
Documents
a Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
Acknowledgement of incomplete application
c Regional Municipality of Durham Building Permit for
Private Sewage System
Drawings
Approved Site Plan
b Architectural Drawings
c Structural Drawings
d HVAC Drawings
Non-residential and other residential
not provided for in row 1la) or 1lb)
New Buildings
Additions
Building Permit
Non-residential and other residential
as in 2la)
Alterations
Renovations
Tenant Occupancies
Documents
a Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
b Acknowledgement of incomplete application
c Commitment to General Reviews by Architect &
Engineers
d Ontario Building Code Data Matrix
e Land and Building Use Declaration
f Flow Control Roof Drainage Declaration
g Confirmation of Energy Efficient Design
h Regional Municipality of Durham Commercial
Development Charges Information form
i School Board Development Charge Information form
Regional Municipality of Durham Building Permit for
Private Sewage System
Drawings
a Approved Site Plan
Approved Grading Plan
c Architectural Drawings
d Structural Drawings
e HVAC Drawings
f Plumbing Drawings
g Electrical Drawings
h Fire Protection Drawings
Geotechnical Report
Specifications
Documents
a Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
b Acknowledgement of incomplete application
c Commitment to General Reviews by Architect &
Engineers
d Ontario Building Code Data Matrix
Drawings
a Location Plan
b Architectural Drawings
c Structural Drawings
HVAC Drawings
e Plumbing Drawings
f Electrical Drawings
g Fire Protection Drawings
SCHEDULE C-PART A
DOCUMENTS & DRAWINGS REQUIRED FOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Row Class of Permit
3,
Building Permits
Other than row 1 to 4
t~ ~!" Documents and Drawings Required
~uments
Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
Acknowledgement of incomplete appl cat on
c Documents from rows la to 2b or other documents
which are app ~cable to the scope of work proposed
Drawings
a Drawings from rows la to 2b which are applicable to
the scope of work proposed
Change of Use Permit
Demolition Permit
Documents
a Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
b Acknowledgement of incomplete application
Drawings
a Locaticn Plan
b Architectural Drawings
c HVAC Drawings
Documents
a Applicable Law Compliance Checklist
b Acknowledgement of~ncomplete application
c Commitment to General Review by Engineer
d Demolition Approvals
Drawings
a Site Plan
Notes:
1, The documents described in this schedule are available from the chief building official,
2. A description of the information required on drawings is contained in Part B of this schedule.
3. The chief building official may waive the requirements for any specified documents or drawings where
the scope of the work, applicable law or building code requirements does not necessitate its
submission.
-17-
Item Drawing Type
1.
Site Plan a
b
SCHEDULE C - PART B
INFORMATION REQUIRED ON_._~AWINGR'
Information ~ql~e~
Lega, des o?¢ r ere ,nes.
property orientation
location andC~'a~¢~_,.,~'ja'~ent roads '
Outline of all~.~tin¢ ~nd proposed buildings
and structur~,~;~building dimensions and their
Class of Permit - Part A Row No. I
i l(a) : l(b) i 2(a) i2(b) j
x x!x
3 4
Grading Plan
Architectural
distance to property lines
Dimensions and location of parking and
vehicle access and fire routes
Dimensions and location of barrier-free
parking, curb cuts, path of travel to building
and building access
a Signature and seal of professional engineer,
landscape architect or Ontario land surveyor
b Property lines, easements sidewalks,
driveways, building location, curb cuts,
retaining walls
c Location of catch basins, above and below
ground utilities, and connections to services
d Existing and proposed elevations within the
site and at property lines, retaining wall
elevation, slopes of driveways, drainage flow
and swales
a Existing plans showing construction and room
and space identification of all floors in the area
of proposed work or occupancy
b Plans of all floors including basements
complete with all rooms and room names
c Roof plan showing roof slope, drainage, roof
and roofing construction details
d Building elevations showing grade, floor and
ceiling heights, overall building height, exterior
finish materials, window heights and sizes and
spatial separation requirements
e Residential construction details including
proposed wall section from footing to roof,
specifications of all wall, floor and roof
assemblies and all building materials and
construction specifications
f Stairs, guards and handrail dimensions and
details, window sizes and height above floor
level; location and fuel type of all fireplaces
Mezzanine plan showing construction,
guardrails, egress
Location and details of barrier free entrances
and barrier free washrooms
Reflected ceiling plans, bulkhead details,
horizontal service shaft details
Roof equipment screening, anchorage for
window washing, roof access
Building cross sections showing grade, floor
and ceiling heights, horizontal and vertical fire
separations
Enlarged sections and detail plans of
washrooms and exit stairs
Wall sections, plan and section construction
details
Exit stair enclosure, wall construction details,
fire separations and listed design numbers,
door numbers referenced to a door schedule
Door and hardware schedule, door and frame
details, window schedule, room finish schedule
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
i
X , X ,XI
-18-
SCHEDULE C - PART B
INFORMATION REQUIRED ON DRAWINGg
Item
V6.
Notes
Drawing Type
Structural
HVAC
Plumbing
Electrical
Fire Protection
Information Require~
a Foundation plans, floor a,~Cl~fframing
plans, footing, colum~r~n~ea~ schedules,
structural details~.~?~'al ~Jpecifications
b Design sP~.~;~t~;~nd dead loading,
wind and ~ ~a~i~g earthquake load n
geotechm~l ~l~rCdesign basis
c Structural ~Vings sealed by a professional
engineer for all structural elements not within
the scope of Part 9 of the building code
d Roof and floor truss drawings sealed by a
professional engineer
Heating, ventilating and air conditioning
plans, service shafts, equipment layout and
schedules
Heat loss and gain calculations, ventilation
design summary
Fire damper locations, kitchen exhaust
equipment
Plumbing and drainage plans; location and
sizing of under and above ground storm,
sanitary and water supply piping and
appurtenances
Location of fire stopping; specifications of
plumbing and firestopping materials
Electrical supply and distribution plans;
location of power and lighting outlets;
equipment schedules; transformer locations
Location and specification of emergency
lighting, emergency generators and exit
signage
Fire hydrant locations, sprinkler and
standpipe distribution plans and schedules;
sprinkler head layout; fire hose cabinet
locations
Location and specification of emergency
lighting, emergency generators and exit
signage; fire alarm system annunciator,
diagrams and specifications
Location of smoke alarms and carbon
monoxide detectors
( lass of Permit - Part A Row No. ~
a) l(b) 2(a)!2(b) ~3 ~4~
X X X X
X X
X X X
X X X
X X X I
X
X
X X X X
X
x
X X
X X
X~ X X X
Where indicated by an X, the information described is required to be included on the drawings for the
class of permit specified.
Required information may be located or consolidated on other drawings rather than the drawing
specified in this schedule.
The chief building official may waive the requirement for any required information specified in this
schedule due to limited scope of work, applicable law or building code requirements.
-19-
SCHEDULE D ~ ' ;~'? '¢ ~'~ ~//~~-~
CODE OF CONDUCT FOR B~DING OFFICIALS
, ~ ~ ~ ......
To promote appropriate standards of beha~u~nforcement acbons by the chief building off~c al and inspectors in
the exercise of a power or the peRormance'~f,~ ~ty under the Building Code Act or the building code.
To prevent practices which may constitute an abuse of power, including unethical or illegal practices, by the chief
building official and inspectors in the exercise of a power or the pe¢ormance of a duty under the Building Code Act or
the building code.
To promote appropriate standards of honesty and integrity in the exercise of a power or the peRormance of a duty
under the Building Code Act or the building code by the chief building official and inspectors.
ENFORCEMENT GUIDELINES
The chief building official, deputy chief building official and inspectors appointed in Schedule A shall comply with this code
of conduct. Any appointed chief building official or inspector who fails to act in accordance with the provisions of this code
may be subject to disciplinary action appropriate to the seriousness of the breach. All allegations concerning a breach of
this code shall be made in writing.
Any person who has reason to believe that this code of conduct has been breached may bring the matter to the attention
of the chief building official. Where the allegation concerns the actions of the chief building official, the matter may be
brought to the attention of the senior staff person to whom the chief building official reports.
Any chief building official or senior staff person who receives a written complaint alleging a significant breach of this code
shall investigate the matter, and where appropriate shall commence disciplinary action in accordance with the
employment standards of the place of work. All communications received by a chief building official or senior staff person
concerning a breach of this code shall be held in confidence. The chief building official or semor staff person shall advise
Council in writing about the particulars of the alleged breach, its investigation and the final disposition of the matter upon
its conclusion.
CODE OF CONDUCT
in exercising powers and performing duties under the Building Code Act, the chief building official and inspectors shall:
exercise powers in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code Act, the building code and other applicable
law that governs the authorization, construction, occupancy and safety of buildings and designated structures, and the
actions, duties and qualifications of chief building officials and inspectors;
2. act to identify and enforce compliance where significant contraventions of the Act or regulations are known to exist;
3. apply all relevant building laws, regulations and standards in a consistent and fair manner, independent of any
influence by interested parties;
4. not accept any personal benefit which may create a conflict with their duties; or perform duties where a personal
interest may create a conflict;
5. obtain the counsel of persons with expertise where the chief building official or inspector does not possess sufficient
knowledge to make an informed judgment; and
6. act honestly, reasonably and professionally in the discharge of their duties.
ATTACHMENT# .... ,Z TO
REPORT # PD_ ¥/-o-5
THE CORPORATION OF THE CIT~I~PICKERING
Being a by-law to amend By-law Number 6519/05 to confirm
General Municipal Fees and Charges pursuant to the
Municipol Act, 2001.
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law
Number 6519/05 on May 2, 2005 to confirm general municipal fees and charges
pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001;
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to
amend the User Fees pertaining to Planning Applications, Agreements and Bylaws, in
the City of Pickering;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
Schedule 'T' to By-law Number 6519/05, as it pertains to fees associated with
Planning Applications, is hereby repealed and the following is substituted
therefore:
PLANNING & DEVLOPMENT DEPARTMENT
User Fee or Charge
(Fee includes GST where applicable)
Fee
PLANNINNG APPLICATIONS (these fees are imposed under the authority of
the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P 13)
Minor Variance
Accessory Structure
Existing Building
Vacant Land
Application Tabling
Special Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment
Zoning By-law Recirculation
Oak Ridges Moraine
Zoning By-law - Removal of Holding
Ministers Zoning Order Amendment
Minor
Major
Picketing Official Plan Amendment
Pickering Official Plan Amendment Recirculation
Oak Ridges Moraine Official Plan Amendment
Regional Official Plan Amendment (not part of a Pickering OPA)
$ 2OO
$ 35o
$ 1,500
$ 2OO
$ 75O
$ 5,000
5OO
5OO
2,225
1,000
1,600
8,000
5O0
5OO
5,000
Land Division
Comments
Land Division Clearance of Conditions
7OO
3OO
Draft Plan of Subdivision
Base Fee
Per Unit Fee
Agreement Fee
Approval Package Fee
Assumption Package Fee
Clearance Release Fee
Recirculation
Draft Plan of Condominium
Recircutation
Agreement Fee
Release
Conversion
Revisions to a Draft Approved Plan
(Red Line Revisions)
Site Plan
Residential
Base Fee
Per Unit
Commercial
Base Fee
per 2,000 m2 fee
Industrial
Base fee
per 2,000m2 fee
Agreement Fee
Amending Site Plan Agreement
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Clearance
$
$
$
$
$
$
10,000
135
3,000
374
1,070
1,000
500
6,500
5OO
2,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
2,500
175
2,500
850
$ 2,500
$ 500
$ 750
$ 400
$ 75O
$ 2,5OO
$ 250
Part Lot Control By-law
Base Fee $ 500
Per unit fee $ 25
The following fees noted under AGREEMENTS & BY-LAWS are herby deleted:
Subdivision, Condominium, Site Plan, Part Lot Control By-law and Assumption
Package
3. The provisions of this By-law shall be effective January 1,2006.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of
December 2005.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debi A. Ben~itv Clerk
PICKERING
· N ~ ,~ ...... TO
IMPORTANT NOTICE
To Building Permit Applicants and Designers
BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2006, DESIGNERS OF BUILDING PERMIT DOCUMENTS WHO ARE
NOT LICENSED ARCHITECTS OR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS MUST:
· BE REGISTERED WITH THE MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING
· POSSESS PROVINCIAL QUALIFICATIONS
· PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR QUALIFICATION AND REGISTRATION ON THE
PERMIT APPLICATION FORM AND ON ALL DESIGN DOCUMENTS
MUNICIPALITIES ARE NOT PERMITTED TO ISSUE PERMITS APPLIED FOR AFTER JANUARY
1, 2006, UNLESS AFFECTED BUILDING DESIGNERS MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS. SOME
DESIGNERS AND PROJECTS ARE EXEMPT, AS DESCRIBED BELOW.
REGISTRATION & QUALIFICATION EXEMPTIONS
· Designers are not required to be re.qistered with the Ministry if they own the building they are
designing, if they are a builder governed by the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act, or if the
project is an addition to or alteration of a house.
· Designers are not required to be aualified by the Ministry if they are designing a house or an
accessory structure not to exceed 50 m2 to a house that they own, or if they are designing an
accessory structure to any house that does not exceed 50 m2 in area.
· Other projects are also exempt from registration and qualification requirements. A complete
listing of exemptions is provided on the back of this form.
· Architects and Professional Engineers are qualified and registered by the Ontario Association of
Architects and Professional Engineers Ontario, and are not required to be registered or qualified
with the Ministry.
INFORMATION REQUIRED ON DOCUMENTS
Designers are now required to provide information about their registration, qualification, and design
responsibility on Schedule 1 to the provincial application form, and on every document submitted for a
building permit. A standard template has been developed to assist designers in providing the
required information on drawings. This template or a similar facsimile may be incorporated into
drawing title blocks, or stickers are available from our office. Where sets of drawings or specifications
contain more than one page, this information is only required on the first page.
The undersigned has reviewed and takes responsibility for this
design, and has the qualifications and meets the requirements set
out in the Ontario Building Code to be a designer.
QUALIFICATION INFORMATION
Required unless design is exempt under 2.17.5.1. of the building code
NAME SIGNATURE BCIN
REGISTRATION INFORMATION
Required unless design is exempt under 2.17.4.1. of the building code
FIRM NAME BCIN
Ontario Buildin~l Code 1997 (subsections 2.17.4 & 2.17.5 )
EXEMPTIONS TO DESIGNER REGISTRATION AND QUALIFICATIONS
This extract from the building code has been edited for clarity and is provided for convenience purposes only.
Registration of Persons Engaged in the
Design Business
A person is exempt from registration if the person's design
activities relate only to
(a) construction of a home as defined under the Ontario
New Home Warranties Plan Act that will be
constructed or sold by that person, if the person is a
builder or vendor as defined in that Act and is
registered under that Act,
(b) construction of a building that is owned by that
person.
(c) construction of a farm building that is
(i) of Iow human occupancy
(ii) of 2 storeys or less in building height, and
(iii)has a building area of less than 600 m2 (6460 ft2),
(d) the extension, material alteration or repair of:
(i) a detached house, semi-detached house,
townhouse or row house containing not more
than two dwelling units in each house, or
(ii) a detached structure that serves a building
described in Subclause (3)(d)(i) and does not
exceed 50 m2 (538 ft2) in building area,
(e) a sewage system to be constructed by that person if
the person is registered under Article 2.18.3.2,
(f) construction of tents described in Sentence
3.13.1.2.(2),
(g) construction of signs,
(h) construction of site services, including
(i) surface drainage, and
(ii) plumbing located underground, either outside a
building or under a building,
(i) construction of a factory-built house certified to
CAN/CSA-A277 "Procedure for Certification of
Factory-Built Houses",
~j) construction of a mobile home conforming to
CAN/CSA-Z240 Series "Mobile Homes",
(k) construction of a park model trailer conforming to
CAN/CSA-Z241 Series "Park Model Trailers",
(I) construction of pre-engineered elements of a
building if the design of the elements is carried out by
a person competent in the specific discipline
appropriate to the circumstances,
(m) construction of appliances, equipment and similar
incidental components of a building, or
(n) construction of a building for which a permit under
Section 8 of the Act is applied for or issued before
January 1, 2006 and for which construction is
commenced within six months after the permit is
issued.
A person is exempt from registration if the person's design
activities are with respect to a detached house, semi-
detached house, townhouse or row house containing not
more than two dwelling units in each house and the design
activities relate only to
(o) a plumbing system
(p) a heating, ventilation and air conditioning system, or
(q) ancillary buildings such as garages.
Designer Qualifications
A person is exempt from qualification if his or her design
activities relate only to
(a) construction of:
(i) a detached house, semi-detached house,
townhouse or row house owned by the person
and containing not more than two dwelling units
in each house, or
(ii) an ancillary building that serves a building
described in Subclause (i).
(b) construction of a farm building that
(i) is of Iow human occupancy,
(ii) is 2 storeys or less in building height, and
(iii)has a building area of less than 600 m2 (6460 ~)
(c) a sewage system to be constructed by that person
and:
(i) the person is registered under Article 2.18.3.2.,
or
(ii) the sewage system is owned by the person,
(d) construction of tents described in Sentence
3.13.1.2.(2),
(e) construction of signs,
(f) construction of site services including
(i) surface drainage, and
(ii) plumbing located underground either outside a
building or under a building,
(g) construction of pre-engineered elements of a building
provided that the design of the elements is carried
out by a person competent in the specific discipline
appropriate to the circumstances,
(h) construction of appliances, equipment and similar
incidental components of a building,
(i) construction of an ancillary building
(i) that serves a detached house, semi-detached
house, townhouse or row house if the house
contains not more than two dwelling units, and
(ii) that does not exceed 50 m2 (538 ft2) building
area, or
construction of a building for which a permit under
Section 8 of the Act is applied for or issued before
January 1, 2006 and for which construction
commences within six months after the permit is
issued.
In order to be qualified, all designers must
successfully complete Ministry of Municipal Affairs
and Housing examinations that test their knowledge
of the legal and technical requirements of the Building
Code related to their area of practice. Architects are
qualified under the building code designation system
administered by the OAA, and are not required to
provide information about their qualification on the
permit application form. For more information
about designer qualification requirements,
contact the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing Building and Development Branch at
416,585.6666 or www.obc.mah..qov.on.ca.
SUMMARY OF DESIGNER REQUIREMENTS IN
X = Registration [R] or Qualification [Q] Required O:
Houses & Townhouses¢) Designed by
New Building Owner
Tarion Builder
Other Designers
Plumbing System
THE BUILDING CODE
Heating, Ventilation and AC Systems
Exempt
R Q
O O
O X
X X
Factory - built House & Foundation
Owner O O
Tarion Builder O X
Other Designers O X
Mobile Home & Foundation or
Park Model Trailer
Owner O O
Tarion Builder O X
Other Designers O X
Accessory Buildings < than 50 m2
Owner O O
Other Designers O X
Accessory Buildings > than 50 m2
Owner O O
Other Designers O X
Deck or porch
Any Designers 0 0
Extension, alteration, or repair
Owner O O
Other Designers O X
Other Residential Buildings
New Building
Owner O O
Other Designers O X
Plumbing System
Owner O O
Other Designers O X
Heating, Ventilation and AC Systems
Designed by R Q
Owner O X
Other Designers X X
Accessory Buildings
Owner O X
Other Designers X X
Extension, alteration, or repair
Owner O X
Other Designers X X
Other Designers X X
O O
Owner X X
Other Designers X X
Category of Qualification
House or Small Buildings
Plumbing House or All Buildings
HVAC House or Building Services
House or Small Buildings
House or Small Buildings
House or Small Buildings
House or Small Buildings
House or Small Buildings
Category of Qualification
House or Small Buildings
Plumbing House or All Buildings
HVAC House or Building Services
House or Small Buildings
House or Small Buildings
SUMMARY OF DESIGNER REQUIREMENTS IN THE BUILDING CODE
X = Registration [R] or Qualification [Q] Required O = Exempt
Non Residential Buildings Designed by R Q Category of Qualification
New Building < 3 storeys or 600 m2 Owner O X Small Buildings
(Major Occupancy Groups D,E,F2 or F3) Other Designers X X
Plumbing System
Owner
Other Designers
O X Plumbing-All Buildings
X x
Heating, Ventilation and AC Systems
Owner O X Building Services
Other Designers X X
Electrical Systems and Fire Protection
Owner O X Detection, Lighting & Power
Other Designers X X and/or Fire Protection
Extension, alteration, or repair
Owner O X Small Buildings
Other Designers X X
New Building > 3 storeys or 600 m2
(Major Occupancy Groups A,B,D,E,F1 ,F2,F3)
Owner O X Detection, Lighting & Power
Other Designers X X and/or Fire Protection
Miscellaneous Structures
Farm Buildings of Low Human Occupancy
Designed by R Q
Owners O X
Other Designers X X
Category of Qualification
Small Buildings
Other Farm Buildings
All Designers
X X Small Buildings
Tents < 225 m2, No Bleachers/No Sidewalls All Designers
O O
Other Tents All Designers
X X Small Buildings
Signs All Designers
O O
Designated Structures in Subsection 2.1.2.
All Designers
Miscellaneous Building Elements
Incidental Appliances & Equipment
Designed by R Q
Owner O O
Other Designers O O
Category of Qualification
Pre-engineered Elements
Competent Person O O
Site Services All Designers O O
Sewage Systems Registered Installer O O
Notes:
(4) A house must be a detached house, a semi-detached house, a town house or a row house containing not more
than 2 dwelling units.
ATTACHMENT #_ Z.~ _TO
REPORT # PD., ~'/'~-~
Application for a Permit to Construct or Demolish
This form is authorized under the Building Code Sentence 2.4.1.1A.(2).
For use by Principal Authority
Application number: Permit number (if different):
Date received: Roll number:
Application submitted to:
(Name of municipality, upper-tier municipality, board of health or conservation authority)
A. Project information
Building number, street name Unit number Lot/con.
Municipality Postal code
Project value est. $
Plan number/other description
Area of work (mz)
B. Applicant Applicant is: [] Owner or [] Authorized agent of owner
Last name First name Corporation or partnership
Street address Unit number Lot/con.
Municipality Postal code Province E-mail
Telephone number Fax Cell number
( ) ( ) ( )
C. Owner (if different from applicant)
Last name First name
Street address
Municipality
Corporation or partnership
Postal code Province
Unit number
E-mail
LoFcon.
Telephone number Fax Cell number
( ) ( ) ( )
D. Builder (optional)
Last name First name Corporation or partnership (if applicable)
Street address Unit number Lot/con.
Municipality Postal code Province E-mail
Telephone number Fax Cell number
( ) ( ) ( )
E. Purpose of application
[] New construction [] Addition to an [] Alteration/repair [] Demolition [] Conditional
existing building Permit
Proposed use of building Current use of building
Description of proposed work
F. Tarion Warranty Corporation (Ontario New Home Warranty Program)
i. Is proposed construction for a new home as defined in the Ontario New Home
Warranties Plan Act? if no, go to section G.
ii. Is registration required under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act?
iii. If yes to (ii) provide registration number(s):
[] Yes CI No
r-I Yes [] No
G. Attachments
~TIACHMENT # /-~'~' TO
i. Attach documents establishing compliance with applicable law as set out in Article 1.1.3.3.
ii. Attach Schedule 1 for each individual who reviews and takes responsibility for design activities.
iii. Attach Schedule 2 where application is to construct on-site, install or repair a sewage system.
iv. Attach types and quantities of plans and specifications for the proposed construction or demolition that are prescribed by the
by-law, resolution, or regulation of the municipality, upper-tier municipality, board of health or conservation authority to which
this application is made.
H. Declaration of applicant
I certify that:
(print name)
1. The information contained in this application, attached schedules, attached plans and specifications, and other attached
documentation is true to the best of my knowledge.
2. I have authority to bind the corporation or partnership (if applicable).
Date Signature of applicant
Personal information contained in this form and schedules is collected under the authority of subsection 8(1.1) of the Building Code Act, 1992, and will be
used in the administration and enforcement of the Building Code Act, 1992. Questions about the collection of personal information may be addressed to: a)
the Chief Building Official of the municipality or upper-tier municipality to which this application is being made, or, b) the inspector having the powers and
duties of a chief building official in relation to sewage systems or plumbing for an upper-tier municipality, board of health or conservation authority to whom
this application is made, or, c) Director, Building and Development Branch, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay St., 2nd Floor. Toronto, M5G
2E5 (416) 585-6666.
Application for a Permit to Construct or Demolish 06/07/05
ATTACHI~IENT #~ .~' TO
Schedule 1' Desioner In[ormation
Use one form for each individual who reviews and takes responsibility for design activities with respect to the project.
A. Project Information
Building number, street name Unit no. I Lot/con.
Municipality I Postal code Plan number/other description
B. Individual who reviews and takes responsibility for design activities
Name Firm
Street address
Municipality Postal code Province
Telephone number
( )
Unit no.
E-mail
(~e nur~ber
Lot/con.
Fax number
( )
Design activities unde~aken by individual identified in Section B. [Building Code Table 2.20.2.1]
[] House CI HVAC- House r--i Building Structural
[] Small Buildings r-I Building Services I-I Plumbing- House
[] Large Buildings i-I Detection, Lighting and Power [] Plumbing-All Buildings
[] Complex Buildings [] Fire Protection [] On-site Sewage Systems
Description of designer's work
D. Declaration of Designer
(print name)
declare that (choose one as appropriate):
I review and take responsibility for the design work on behalf of a firm registered under subsection 2.17.4. of the
Building Code. I am qualified, and the firm is registered, in the appropriate classes/categories.
Individual BCIN:
Firm BCIN:
I review and take responsibility for the design work and am qualified in the appropriate category as an "other
designer" under subsection 2.17.5. of the Building Code.
Individual BCIN:
Basis for exemption from registration:
[] The design work is exempt from the registration and qualification requirements of the Building Code.
Basis for exemption from registration and qualification:
I certify that:
1. The information contained in this schedule is true to the best of my knowledge.
2. I have authority to bind the corporation or partnership (if applicable).
Date Signature of Designer
'For the purposes of this form, "individual" means the "person" referred to in Clause 2.17.4.7.(1 )(d), Article 2.17.5.1. and all other persons who are exemp
from qualification under Subsections 2.17.4. and 2.17.5.
NOTE:
1. Firm and Individual BCIN numbers are not required for building permit applications submitted prior to January 1,2006
2. Schedule 1 does not need to be completed by architects, or holders of a Certificate of Practice or a Temporary License under the Architects Act.
Application for a Permit to Construct or Demolish Schedule 1 06/07/05
ATTACHMENT# ,,¢..~-, TO
FEPORT ~ PD '-//'Od
Schedule 2: Sewage System Installer Information
A. Project Information
Building number, street name
Unit number [ Lot/con.
Municipality
Postal code Plan number/other description
B. Sewage system installer
Is the installer of the sewage system engaged in the business of constructing on-site, installing, repairing, servicing, cleaning or
emptying sewage systems, in accordance with Building Code Article 2.18.1.17
[] Yes (Continue to Section C) [] No (Continue to Section E) [] Installer unknown at time of
application (Continue to Section E)
C. Registered installer information (where answer to B is "Yes")
Name BCIN
Street address Unit number Lot/con.
Municipality Postal code Province E-mail
Telephone number Fax Cell number
( ) ( ) ( )
D. Qualified supervisor information (where answer to section B is "Yes"
Name of qualified supervisor(s) Building Code Identification Number (BClN)
E, Declaration of Applicant:
I declare that:
(print name)
I am the applicant for the permit to construct the sewage system. If the installer is unknown at time of application, 1 shall
submit a new Schedule 2 prior to construction when the installer is known;
I am the holder of the permit to construct the sewage system, and am submitting a new Schedule 2 now that the installer is
known.
I certify that:
1. The information contained in this schedule is true to the best of my knowledge.
2. I have authority to bind the corporation or partnership (if applicable).
Date Signature of applicant
Application for a Permit to Construct or Demolish Schedule 2 06107/05
AF1A~Hi~EN1/~- ~ TO
REPORI ~ Pi)__ ~Vt~-~5
Applicable Law Checklist
Pursuant to Section G of an application to Construct or Demolish
Application no. Address
For use by Principal Authority
Date
The following approval processes must be completed if they apply to this project, before a building permit can be issued. This
listing is provided for convenience purposes only and does not necessarily describe every approval which may be necessary. For
more detailed information about the application of these laws to any project, please contact the listed agency, or refer to the actual
text of the legislation. For assistance in completing this form, please contact your municipal building department.
Completing this form accurately and providing necessary documents will expedite the issuance of your building permit.
~[ Lo~Please check [,/] the items that apply, and attach approval documents where
applicable.
U---~~Y- ; ~ ~~- R~I-R-~- -~'OCUMENTS RECEIVED '~ ]
[] MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act s. 45
Where application doesn't comply with all zoning provisions
[] ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT Planning Act s. 34
Where development requires amended zoning by-law
[] DIVISION OF LAND Ref. Planning Act Part VI
Where land division required for zoning compliance
[] PROVINCIAL ZONING ORDERS Planning Act s. 47
For areas covered by Minister's zoning orders
[] SITE PLAN APPROVAL Planning Act s. 41
For development in site plan control areas
[] Planning & Development Act
Where Provincial planning control has been applied
Heritage
HERITAGE PERMITS
Ontario Heritage Act s. 33, 34
Where property is designated under the Heritage Act
Ontario Heritage Act s. 42
Where land is in a heritage conservation district
Fortifications
BUILDING FORTIFICATIONS
Where building is fortified against entry
Final & binding decision by Committee of Adjustment
Contact: Local Planning Department
Zoning by-law final & binding
Contact: Local Planning Department
Registration of Plan or Deed
Contact: Local Planning Department
Approval of the Minister
Contact: MMAH Services Office in your region
Approval of site plans by municipality
Contact: Local Planning Department
Approval of the Minister
Contact: MMAH Services Office in your region
Consent of Council to alter or demolish
Contact: Local Heritage Committee or Clerk of Municipality
Heritage permit issued by Council
Contact: Local Heritage Committee or Clerk of Municipality
Compliance with the local fortification by-law, if any
Contact: Local by-law enforcement office
J CONSERVATION AUTHORITY ,,' FORM OF APPROVAL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS RECEIVED '~' J
Conservation
AUTHORITY PERMIT Conservation Authorities Act s. 28
Where construction is in a fill regulated area or floodplain,
or may interfere with a watercourse
Construction & fill permit
Contact: Local Conservation Authority Office
PROVINCIAL APPLICABLE LAWS
FORM Of APPROVAL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS RECEIVED
Agriculture & Food
[] Nutrient Management Act 2002 s. 11
Farm buildings housing animals or animal manure
[] Milk Act s. 14
Where building used as a milk processing plant
Charitable Institutions
[] Charitable Institutions Act s. 5
Where building is used for a charitable institution
Ministry of A.qriculture & Food
Ministry approval of nutrient management strategy
Contact: John Johnson, P. Eng. 519~873-4096
Permit issued by the Director, MAF
Contact: Food Inspection Branch 1-888-466-2372
Ministry of Health & Lonq Term Care
Minister's approval of construction
Contact: Long-Term Care Planning 1-877-767-8889
PROVINCIAL APPLICABLE LAWS [continued] '~, APPROVALS REQUIRED DOCUMENTS RECEIVED
Child Care Centres
Day Nurseries Act s. 5
Where building is used for a daycare
Education
DEMOLITION OF SCHOOLS
Education Act s. 194
Where a school is proposed to be demolished
Environment
[] Environmental Assessment Act s. 5
Major industrial or commercial enterprises &
Government projects
[] MOE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
Environmental Protection Act s. 9
Where building may discharge contaminants
[] BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
Environmental Protection Act s. 168
Where industrial or commercial property changed
to residential or parkland use
[] FORMER LANDFILLS
Environmental Protection Act s. 46
Where building on former waste disposal site
Ministry of Children & Youth Services
Ministry plan approval
Contact: Regional Office in your area
Funeral Homes
Funeral Directors and Establishments Act s. 9
Where building houses funeral establishment
Ministry of Education
Minister's approval of demolition
Contact: Steve Mitchell, Architect 416-325-2015
Highways
MTO PERMIT Public Transportation Act s. 34/38
Where construction is adjacent to a highway, or is
within 800m of highway & will generate major traffic
Ministry of the Environment
Minister's approval of Terms of reference & EA
Contact: MOE Assessment & Approvals 1-800-461-6290
Certificate of Approval issued by MOE
Contact: MOE Investigations & Enforcement 416-326-6700
Record of Site Condition filed with MOE
Conformance with Certificate of Property Use
Contact: Tim Krsul, MOE Central Region 416-326-4840
Minister's approval to use the land
Contact: MOE Investigations & Enforcement 416-326-6700
Hospitals
[] Public Hospitals Act s. 4
Hospital buildings
[] Private Hospitals Act s. 22
Where house used as a private hospital
Ministry of Consumer & Business Services
Notify Registrar, MCBS
Contact: Board of Funeral Services 1-800-387-4458
Ministry of Transportation
Building & Land Use permit issued by MTO
Contact: Local or Regional Office of MTO
Ministry of Health & Lon,q Term Care
Minister's approval of construction
Contact: Ministry of Health Capital Planning 416-327-8725
Minister's approval of alteration or renovation
Contact: Ministry of Health Capital Planning 416-327-8725
Senior Citizens
NURSING HOME LICENSING
Nursing Homes Act s. 4, 5
Construction, alteration or conversion of building to nursing home
Ministry of Health & Lon.q Term Care
License issued by Director, MOH
Contact: MOH & Long Term Care Regional Office in your area
RETIREMENT HOMES
Homes for the Aged & Rest Homes Act s. 14
Elderly Persons Centres Act s. 6
Where building used as a home for the aged
Minister's approval of construction
Contact: Planning & Renewal Branch 1-877-767-8889
DECLARATION BY APPLICANT PLEASE CHECK EITHER LINE 1 OR LINE 2
[] 1. All applicable law approvals have been completed, and approval documents are attached to this application.
[] 2. The proposed construction or demolition requires one or more applicable law approvals which have not yet been completed.
I have authority to act on behalf of the corporation or partnership with respect to this application (if applicable)
Name: Signature: Date:
Original - Municipality Copy - Applicant
A'r'rAcw, J~'rJ (o ........ TO
CITY OF PICKERING
ACTIVITY BASED COSTING
REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION APPROVALS
PROCESS (DAAP) USER FEES
NOVEMBER, 2005
PLANNING FOR GROWTH
C.N. WATSON
AND ASSOCIATES LTD.
ECONOMISTS
4304 Village Centre Court
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
L4Z 1 S2
Telephone: (905) 272-3600
Fax: (905) 272-3602
e-mail: In fo(ig)cnwats on.on.ca
ATIACHMENT ~ ~ TO
REF'OR1 # PD /-/I -C.~
EXECUT] VE SUMIVlARY
C.N. Watson and Associates Limited, in association with Performance Concepts, was retained by
the City of Pickering during 2005 to undertake an activity based costing review of its DAAP
Building Code Act and Planning Act mandated user fees. An activity based costing methodology
and Excel model have been developed to attribute costs from all relevant City departments to
the appropriate DAAP fee categories. Direct operating costs, indirect support and overhead
costs, non-growth capital replacement costs are all eligible for fees based recovery. This fees
review will ensure the City achieves compliance with the building permit fee design provisions of
Bill 124. The City will also be in a position to deal with Bill 124's 2006 budget impact re. cost
recovery for Planning Act application review processes.
Key deliverables/findings emerging from the DAAP fee review exercise are as follows:
· A $1.2 million approximate shortfall of Planning Act DAAP revenues across all fee
categories compared to ABC modeled costs.
A $76,000 approximate shortfall of Building Code Act DAAP revenues compared to
ABC modeled costs (including a modeled $166,000 annual stabilization reserve fund
contribution).
· Significant percentage increases in modeled "full cost" Planning Act fees, and a 6%
across-the-board increase in modeled Building permit fee schedule.
· A modeled Building Code Act stabilization reserve fund (target balance of $1.16
million accumulated over seven years).
· A City staff"proposed" Planning Act DAAP fee schedule reflecting policy
considerations.
· A City staff"proposed" Building Code Act compliant fee schedule reflecting policy
considerations.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATTACHMENT # ~ TO
RE~OR'i # PD zCl-~'-~
impact analysis of City staff proposed residential, commercial and industrial
development scenarios - documenting the relatively minor increases in overall local
government input costs associated the these development scenarios.
A GTA survey of DAAP fee and development charge impacts on residential,
commercial and industrial development scenarios - documenting the generally
favourable positioning of the City in the Durham and broader GTA "market" vis-a-vis
development community location decisions.
This technical report, and the methodology/findings contained herein, has been shared
with development community stakeholders as part of the City DAAP fees amendment
process.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATIACHMENT # ~ TO
REPORI ~ PD~ff/-~
CONTENTS
PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION TO DAAP FEES REVIEW
3
LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT FOR DAAP FEES REVIEW
2.1 DAAP Planning Act and Building Code Act fees
ACTIVITY BASED COSTING USER FEE METHODOLOGY
3.1 Process Undertaken
3.2 Technical Evaluation of Full Cost Fees Model
6
9
11
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS APPROVALS PROCESS
USER FEES
16
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Bill 124 Cost Recovery Background
Consolidated Full Cost DAAP Fee Calculations
Reserve Fund Design
Consolidated Full Cost Fee Calculations & Reserve Fund
Recommended DAAP Fees Adjustments
Impact Analysis of Proposed Fee Increases
Inter-Municipal Survey of Development Process Fees
5. OVERALL DAAP FEE REVIEW CONCLUSIONS
34
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATTAOHIViEi',?I' ,? ~ . I,
REPOP, I ~ P['J ~1 -0~
INTRODUCTION
Introduction to Development Applications Approvals Process
(DAAP) Fees Review
C.N. Watson and Associates Limited, in association with Performance Concepts, was retained by
the City of Pickering during 2005 to undertake an activity based costing review of its Building
Code Act and Planning Act mandated user fees. The Development Applications Approvals
Process (DAAP) fees review was in reaction to Bill 124 - new Provincial legislation amending
key provisions of the Building Code Act. Bill :1.24 imposes new staff qualifications, imposes new
permit processing turnaround times, and restricts fee design to only cover costs associated with
"administration and enforcement" of the Building Code Act. Planning Act mandated
development review processes, traditionally funded in part by surplus Building Code Act
revenues, can no longer be funded in this fashion according to the provisions of Bill 124. This
DAAP fees review will ensure the City achieves compliance with the building permit fee design
provisions of Bill 124. The City will also be in a position to deal with Bill 124's 2006 budget
impact re. cost recovery for Planning Act application review.
The scope of the undertaking consists of providing the City with a legislative compliance
framework for fees and charges mandated by the P/ann/ng Act and the 8ui/ding Code Act, as
well as the development of an activity based costing (ABC) model for calculating "full cost"
Development Applications Approvals Process (DAAP) fees. The work plan initiated by the
consulting team consisted of seven interrelated tasks as follows:
A facilitated workshop with City staff from multiple departments, reviewing the
legislative provisions and operational/fee design implications of Bill 124. The workshop
ensured all City staff has a common understanding re. significant operational and
financial challenges inherent in Bill 124.
The preparation of process maps for all Planning Act and Building Code Act fee
categories contained in the City's DAAP fee by-laws. These maps reflect the major
process steps employed by staff in issuing building permits, conducting inspections and
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATTACHMENI' #_ ~ TO
REPORT it
6
carrying out the enforcement provisions of the Building Code Act. The maps also reflect
process steps associated with all major Planning Act applications.
Using the above noted DAAP process maps, permit and application processing times for
all involved staff in each category were calculated. Average time expended for a single
run of the typical/average Planning Act and/or Building Code Act process was recorded.
Single-run time was then applied against historical annual permit/application volumes to
calculate total time spent per year per staff on Planning Act and Building Code Act
mandated activities. Total time spent per involved staff member was then analyzed in
terms of its relative share of that same staff member's available capacity time. This
capacity review process was repeated 2-3 times to ensure accurate time allocation
shares across all staff and DAAP application categories.
4. :Indirect support and overhead costs were identified and allocated to direct DAAP
departments using operational cost driver data.
An ABC fees model was constructed in Excel. The key to the model is the flow of cost
data according to the indirect cost drivers and the time estimated % share of available
direct staff time noted in task # 3 above. The ABC model was used to produce full cost
Planning Act and Building Code Act DAAP fee schedules. These full cost fee schedule
impacts were analysed in terms of per unit residential, commercial and industrial
scenarios.
A Bill :[24 compliant reserve fund for service delivery stabilization during an economic
downturn was designed. A stabilization reserve fund target balance and accumulation
strategy was prepared. A variety of Planning Act fee structures and discount scenarios
were prepared and reviewed by City staff.
A peer municipality "market" survey of development process fees was undertaken to
ensure fees adjustments would not adversely impact on development location decisions
involving Pickering.
~[n accordance with the above noted tasks, this technical report will provide a detailed
description of the fees review methodology, and will analyze the "full cost" DAAP fee schedules
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATTACHMENT ,~ ~ '1U
REPORT ~ PD ~1,0~.:)
7
calculated by the City's new ABC fees model. Reserve fund design and fees impact analysis will
be provided in the report. A peer municipality development fees survey is also supplied.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
.~T~ACHMENI'
REPORT
8
LEGI'SLATI'VE CONTEXT FOR BUI'LDI'NG FEES REVI'EW
2.:[ Section 69 Planning Act Fees
Section 69 of the Planning Act, allows municipalities to impose fees through by-law for the
purposes of processing planning applications. :In determining the associated fee, the Act
requires that:
"The council of a municipality, by by-law, and a planning board, by resolution, may establish a
tariff of fees for the processing of applications made in respect of planning matters, which tariff
shall be designed to meet only the anticipated cost to the municipality or to a committee of
adjustment or land division committee constituted by the council of the municipality or to the
planning board in respect of the processing of each type of application provided for in the
tariff."
There is no specific requirement for actual cost justification within planning application fees, in
that the Act only requires municipalities to have regard for the "anticipated cost" of providing
the service. Therefore, such fees and charges will include direct costs, non-growth capital-
related costs, support function costs directly related to the service provided and general
overhead costs apportioned to the various DAAP processes. Tn addition, municipalities should
have regard for legal precedents and impacts on the development market when establishing
such fees. :It should also be noted that the payment of Planning Act fees can be made under
protest with appeal to the Ontario IVlunicipal Board (OIVIB). The OMB will hear such an appeal
and determine if the appeal should be dismissed or direct the municipality to refund payment in
such amount as determined by the Board.
2.2 Bill :[24 and the Building CodeAct
Bill 124, the Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002 was given Royal Assent on June
27, 2002 and substantially amended the Building Code Act, 1992 as it relates to imposing fees.
The changes provided within the Act, are as a result (in part) of the report recommendations of
the Building Regulatory Reform Advisory Group (BRRAG), which were offered to address issues
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review- July 2005
ATTACHMENT#_~
REPORI # ~D_=,~
9
of public safety, streamlining and accountability. While portions of the amendments came into
force on September l, 2003, and July 1st 2005, the amendments relating to fees comes into
force on January :Ct, 2006.
With respect to establishing fees under the Bui/ding Code Act, Section 7 of the Act provides
municipalities with general powers to impose fees through passage of a by-law. The Act
provides that:
"The council of a municipality...may pass by-laws
(c) Requiring the payment of fees on applications for and issuance of permits and
prescribing the amounts thereof;
(d) Providing for refunds of fees under such circumstances as are prescribed;"
The Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002 imposed additional requirements on
municipalities in establishing fees under the Act, in that:
"The total amount of the fees authorized under clause (~) (c) must not exceed the anticipated
reasonable cost of the principal authority to administer and enforce this Act in its area of
jurisdiction."
In addition, the amendments also require municipalities to:
Reduce fees to reflect the portion of service performed by a Registered Code Agency;
Prepare and make available to the public annual reports with respect to the fees
imposed under the Act and associated costs; and
Undertake a public process, including notice and public meeting requirements, when a
change in the fee is proposed.
O.Reg. 305/03 is the associated regulation arising from the Building Code Statute Law
Amendment Act, 2002. The regulation provides further details on the contents of the annual
report and the public process requirements for the imposition or change in fees. With respect
to the annual report, it must contain the total amount of fees collected, the direct and indirect
costs of delivering the services related to administration and enforcement of the Act, and the
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
,4 rYACHMENT #~TO
10
amount of any reserve fund established for the purposes of administration and enforcement of
the Act. The regulation also requires that notice of the preparation of the annual report be
given to any person or organization that has requested such notice.
Relating to the public process requirements for the imposition or change in fees, the regulations
require municipalities to hold at least one public meeting and that at least 21-days' notice be
provided via regular mail to all interested parties. Moreover, the regulations require that such
notice include, or be made available upon request to the public, an estimate of the costs of
administering and enforcing the Act, the amount of the fee or change in existing fee and the
rationale for imposing or changing the fee.
Similar to the provisions for certain services under Part X:[! of the Municipal Act (i.e. water,
sewer, waste management, fire and police) there is a specific requirement for cost justification
when establishing Building Code Act fees. The Act specifically requires that fees "must not
exceed the anticipated reasonable costs" of providing the service. As the requirements of the
Act do not limit municipalities to the costs directly related to the service, as provided within the
Municipal Act for licensing fees, it would appear that Building Code Act fees can include general
overhead indirect costs related to the provision of service (e.g. council, corporate services,
etc.). Moreover, the recognition of anticipated costs also suggests that municipalities could
include costs related to future compliance requirements or fee stabilization reserve fund
contributions. As a result, Building Code Act fees include direct costs, capital-related costs,
indirect support function costs directly related to the service provided and general overhead
indirect costs related to the service provided, as well as provisions for future anticipated costs.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
11
3. ACTIVITY BASED COSTING USER FEES
METHODOLOGY
3.:L Process Undertaken
Cost Allocation Methodology
An activity based costing methodology attributes costs from all relevant City
departments to the appropriate DAAP fee categories. Direct operating costs, indirect
support and overhead costs, non-growth capital replacement costs are all eligible for
fees based recovery. Figure 3-A is instructive in this regard.
Figure 3-A ABC Cost Flow Diagram
How Costs Flow
__~ Fees Model
Step 1 Step 2
Support Overhead
Functions Functions
"A" Drivers
Drivers
"B" Drivers
"A" Drivers
Thru City's DAAP
Step 3
Direct DAAP
Departments
Minutes
Drivers
Minutes
Drivers
Minutes
Drivers
Examples of
DAAP
Fee Schedule
Categories
Site Plan
Sub-division
Building Permit
Residential
Building Permit
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
£
.... ,
12
Figure 3-A traces eligible fee recovery costs from support and overhead
functions/business units to direct City departments engaged in Planning Act and Building
Code Act mandated work. Support function and overhead costs are distributed
according to operational cost drivers (e.g. :IT costs distributed by relative share of
personal computers supported by :[T). Once support and overhead costs are nested
with direct departments, these department costs must be distributed across DAAP fee
categories or "buckets". This is accomplished by tracking relative staff time/effort
across the various fee categories' sequence of process steps - hereby referred to as
"service channels".
Time Estimate Based Cost Allocation
The consulting team prepared time tracking estimates to capture each involved City staff
position's relative level of effort in Planning Act and/or Building Code Act mandated
work. :[n-depth discussions were held as to the scope and nature of various
departments' involvement in Planning Act and/or Building Code Act mandated work.
The time estimation worksheets set out the specific process steps in each DAAP fee
category "service channel". Typical minute estimates per process step were recorded
for all involved City staff - summing up to the time for a single "run" of a
typical/average DAAP permit/application in each fee category. Time estimation process
steps for Building Code Act work generally covered pre-application support, application
receipt, zoning review, architectural/mechanical plans examination, grading review,
permit issuance, all required inspections, and enforcement activity. Planning Act process
steps, derived from detailed "customized" flow charts, were used to collect minute
estimates.
Single run time estimates per staff position were applied against historic application
volumes to determine typical annual minutes per position spent on Planning Act and/or
Building Code Act mandated work. Typical annual minutes per position were then
compared against total annual available minutes per position (48 weeks X 35 hours X 60
minutes = total available minutes). This "capacity analysis" ensures realistic time/effort
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
13
estimates are provided for each staff position (i.e. approximately :[00% or less of
available capacity per involved position is finding its way into the fee calculations).
IVlultiple iterations of capacity analysis results were collected, reviewed and finalized.
Eligible costs for fee recovery (i.e. nested support/overhead costs plus direct department
costs) follow the relative % share of each involved staff member's time estimates
deployed across the DAAP fee categories and their respective service channel steps.
Znvolved City Business Units in Planning Act and Building Code Act l~landated
Activity
Figure 3-B City Business Un/ts Contributing Costs to DAAP Fees Categories
Support & Overhead
Functions/Business Units
Direct Business Units
Estimating Minutes per
Typical Application (by
category)
Mayor/Council/Clerks Planning & Development Services -
Planning, Building, Development
Control, Information Support
Chief Administrators Office Fire & Emergency Services
Legal, Supplies & Purchasing Services Municipal Property and Engineering
Human Resources, Information Technology Culture & Recreation
Print Shop/Mail,
Property Services
Finance, Customer Care Centre
Support Function and Overhead Cost Drivers
The choice of cost drivers for allocating support functions and overheads plays an
important role in the calculation of "full cost" DAAP fees across all categories. These
cost drivers are typically not based on staff time estimates/allocations. City staff
positions from these business units do not participate directly in DAAP applications work
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
14
- however they do enable the direct departments to do so. Their cost driver data
measures the relative consumption of support functions and overheads by direct
departments. The relative share of a given cost driver (units of work) per direct
department determines the relative share of support/overhead costs attributed to that
direct department. This allocation is referred to as its "nested" support costs.
Figure 3-C Support/Overhead Functions and Cost Drivers Used in Fu// Cost Fees
Ca/cu/at/ons
Support or Overhead
Business Unit/Function
Governance - Mayor/Council/Clerks
(Step 2)
Human Resources (Step
Information Technology (Step 1)
Print Shop/Mail (Step 2)
Supplies & Purchasing Services
(Step 2)
Property Services (Step 1)
Cost Driver Used in Full Cost Fees Calculation
Relative # of Council/Committee Agenda Items by Department
· Best available proxy indicator for the relative amount of
effort Governance actors devote to the various
departmental issues from across the City
Relative # of departmental Staff Head Counts
· Best available proxy indicator for the relative effort devoted
to large/small City business units
Relative # of Supported Computer Workstations
· Best available proxy indicator of relative effort consumed
per staffed workstation
Relative number of Pieces Handled
· Accurately measures effort across City business units
Relative # Purchase Orders
· Accurately measures relative effort applied across client
business units
Relative # of Square Feet in City Hall Maintained
· Best available proxy indicator of relative maintenance
effort consumed per department served
Finance, Chief Administrator, Legal, Relative % share of gross operating budgets by department
Customer Care Centre (Step 2)
Support and overhead costs are stepped forward in the full cost fees model. Step 1
support functions (Human Resources, Tnformation Technology, Property Services) are
stepped forward to Step 3 direct departments (primarily) and Step 2 support functions
(partially). Step 1 functions do not allocate drivers/costs to each other. Step 2
overhead functions allocate their nested costs from Step ! and their own costs forward
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
15
to Step 3 direct departments. Step 2 functions do not allocate to each other, nor do
they allocate backwards to Step I functions. Figure 3-D provides a simplified visual
perspective on how support and overhead costs step forward in the City's full cost ABC
fee model. Other Step 2 functions not included in the diagram would have identical cost
flow patterns.
Figure 3-D Step Cost AI/ocation Diagram
Rules for Attributing Support
Functions: STEP lVlethodology
Driver Pool
(% Budget)
Low % Costs
Move Forward To Step
Nested
Costs from Step 1
Finance
.o
Allocation
Within Stepl
Remove
Their Drivers
From Driver
Pool Totals
Driver Pool
(% FTE)
Low % Costs
Move Forward To Step 2
No Backwards O
Or Within Step 2
AIIocationsl
Nested Costs
Governance
Driver Pool
(% Sq Feet)
Low % Costs
Move Forward To Step 2
Adjusted
Driver
Pools
100% Finance Costs
Move Forward
To Direct Depts
Adjusted
Driver
Pools
100% Admin Costs
Move Forward
To Direct Depts
High % Step 1
Costs Flowing to
Step 3 Direct Depts
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
16
3.:L
Technical Evaluation of Pickering Based Costing (ABC)
DAAP Fees Model
The following table provides an independent technical evaluation of the City's ABC "full
cost" fees model (design). The evaluation is based on emerging municipal best
practices around DAAP Planning Act and Building Code Act user fees design. The
evaluation criteria are as follows:
· Fee category/bucket selection and documentation
· Cost driver selection and documentation
· Support & overhead cost attribution methodology
· Capital cost attribution methodology
· Defendable time estimates for allocating direct department costs to fee
categories/buckets
The findings in Figure 3-E lead to a determination that Pickering's ABC modeling
assumptions, design decisions and data provision provide a strong justification for "full
cost" DAAP user fee calculations and compliance with Bill 124 fees provisions.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
~,.77 A[;HIV;EI~T #_.. ~ TO
;~EPORT ,~ PD...,.~ .-C,~
8
18
am
MODELED FULL COST FEE SCHEDULE & ]:MPACT
ANALYS]:S
4.1 Bill 124 Cost Recovery Background
GTA and other Ontario municipalities have traditionally used building permit revenues (in
excess of Building Department costs) to assist in funding under-recovering early stage
DAAP work mandated by the Planning Act. With the recovery of full processing costs
related to P/anning,4ctapplications perceived as onerous by applicants whose land
holdings had not yet accumulated a significant share of expected value, this traditional
municipal sector approach had merit. It recognized that at the building permit stage in
the development process, the applicant's cash flow and ability to pay based on land
capitalization are typically well established. IVloreover, other development related fees
(e.g. Development Charges) are also typically collected at this point in the service
channel, which further streamlines the process of collections for the municipality and the
applicant.
Regrettably, the Bill 124 amendments to the Building Code Act do not recognize that in
practice Planning Act and Building Code Act development review activities function
together as a single integrated review process - DAAP. Section 7 of the Building Code
Act now restricts the use of building permit revenues to recover only the "anticipated
reasonable costs" of services mandated by the Building Code Act. IVloreover, Building
Code Act revenues, direct costs, indirect costs, and reserve fund balances must be
reported to the Province on an annual basis. The cost accounting discipline required to
comply with Bill ::[24 has revealed significant cost recovery issues that need to be
addressed within the Planning Act defined component of the DAAP service channel. Our
firms' Planning Act fee review experience in other GTA jurisdictions has revealed cost
recovery shortfalls of 60% or more. Pickering's Planning Act fee recovery performance
is consistent with our findings elsewhere.
19
4.2 Consolidated "Full Cost" Planning Act and Building Code
Hodeling
Figure 4-A documents the full cost components of the modeled fees.
R'gure 4-A Consol/dated Fees Impact
DAAP Fee Impact: Cost &
Revenue Summary
(Full Cost, With Bill 124 Reserve Fund)
Modeled
Node/ed Nodel/ t..'~.v ~ c,nt
Nodeled Costs: Total
Fee Description Costs: Costs: Non- Mede/ed Budget
Direct Indirect & growth Costs Fee Position
Overheads Revenues
Capital
P/anningAct 1,228,653 265,641 7,740 1,502,034 262,293 ( 1,2 ~%742)
Fees
Bui/dingCode 1,029,455 193,821 7,995 1,231,271 1,320,862
Act Fees
Direct operating costs originating in multiple City departments total $1,228,653 across
all Planning Act fee categories. Indirect and overhead costs of $265,641 have been
stepped across direct departments and onwards into the various fee categories.
Support costs represent less than one third of total modeled operating costs. Non-
growth capital replacement costs (annual annuity) are $7,740. Total modeled operating
costs are $1,502,034.
Direct operating costs originating in multiple City departments total $1,029,455 across
all Building Code Act fee categories. Support costs of $~93,82:L have been stepped
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
20
across direct departments and onwards into the various fee categories. Support costs
represent approximately one fifth of annual modeled operating costs. Non-growth
capital costs (annual annuity) are $7,995. Total modeled operating costs are
$1,231,271.
4.3 Reserve Fund Design
Bill 124 municipal financial reporting regulations recognize the legitimacy of creating a
municipal reserve fund(s) to manage Building Code Act responsibilities. However, the
Act and its regulations are silent on the design/rationale of reserve funds. Some latitude
therefore exists around rationale, along with an obligation to quantify reserve fund
target balances.
It is recommended that the establishment of ongoing contributions to a Building Code
/~ct Fee Stabilization Reserve Fund (FSRF) become a critical component of the City's Bill
124 preparedness strategy. The FSRF would be created specifically for smoothing any
shortfalls within the Building Code Act fees, and would not be available to fund any
other municipal financial priorities. The rationale for a FSRF is to reduce the staffing and
budgetary challenges associated with an economic downturn and legislative service level
compliance. Without such a reserve fund, reduced growth and permit volumes during a
downturn could result in severe budgetary pressures and the loss of certified Building
Department staff, which would be difficult to replace during the subsequent economic
recovery. Establishing a reserve fund will provide the City with the ability to retain a
sustainable portion of the qualified staff across an economic downturn (service delivery
continuity), while recognizing the municipality's need to manage resources during times
of economic downturns either through redeployment or attrition - until permit volumes
improve during an economic recovery.
A number of key reserve fund design issues need to be considered in establishing a
Building Code Act FSRF, these include:
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
21
1. Rationale for Reserve Fund- Degree of Risk Mitigation
2. Ultimate Reserve Fund Balance- Target Design Based on Empirical Experience
3. Pace of Reserve Fund Accumulation - Forecast Annual Contributions
Reserve Fund Rationale
Recent economic history suggests that an economic downturn lasting a number of years
is a definite possibility, Figure 4-B illustrates the reduction in permit activity that
occurred in Pickering during the early 1990s recession.
Figure 4-B Lost Pickering Permit Processing Volumes/n Previous Recess/on
Determine Reserve Fund Target Balance
by Looking at Past Recession
Residential Building Permit Information For Pickering
1985-2004
2,500 ~
I
:, I
1,500 ~ ~(-;'.i;~"~ ~!~ i!i I
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Source: Statscan Building Permit Data
Tn comparing the economic downturn experienced during the 1989-94 period compared
to the 20-year annual average rate of development, approximately 1.5 years of
cumulative permit volumes were lost. The City's proposed new stabilization reserve
fund will need to manage the risk associated with a similar recession occurring at some
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
22
unspecified point in the future. The City will need to retain certified and skilled labour
through such an economic downturn. However, given the depth and length of the
previous recession, there will be a responsibility on the part of the City to manage a
portion of these ongoing staff costs either through attrition or redeployment. We
assume 25% of direct departments DAAP costs will be managed internally by the City
during an economic downturn.
Ultimate Reserve Fund Balance - Optimal Target
Given the primary rationale for creating a fee stabilization reserve fund (mitigating the
financial and operational risk associated with an economic recession), the targeted
reserve fund balance should reflect the reduction in permits witnessed during the last
recession when compared to the long-run development average - acknowledging again
the City's responsibility to manage a portion of the costs associated with an economic
downturn. Therefore, to ensure that sufficient reserves are established for these
purposes, the City should accumulate a reserve balance equivalent to approximately
1.13 years of Building Code Act DAAP direct costs. Based on the modeled activity based
direct costs of approximately $1.029 million annually; this would translate into a current
FSRF target balance of approximately $1.16 million ($1.029 million X 1.13 years). The
u/t/mate reserve target is 1.13 years of direct operating cost, not the current $1,16
million current representation of this multiple.
Pace of Reserve Fund Accumulation
Pickering needs to consider the reality that, since the end of WWII, each Canadian
economic"business cycle" expansion has averaged 9-12 years in duration. A prudent
review of economic conditions suggests the City accumulate the FSRF target balance as
soon as possible. However, the future development volume increases associated with
the new Seaton community are still some years away (as are the unavoidable staffing
increases required to process this development). For reasons of economic fairness,
future Seaton applicants should significantly fund the FSRF - not just current applicants.
Therefore, compared to other GTA jurisdictions, a moderate pace for FSRF accumulation
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
ATTACHMENT ~ ~ .......TO
REPORT # PD........ ~ ................
23
is appropriate. :In order to balance the "go fast" business cycle and "go slower" fairness
factors - a seven year FSRF accumulation strategy has been modeled. The annual FSRF
contribution would be $166,000 annually. The establishment of the recommended FSRF
and timely progress towards the target balance requires relatively minor 6% across-the-
board building permit rate increases. Rate adjustments would have to be considerably
higher than 6% if the FSRF target balance were to be accumulated more quickly than
the modeled seven years. It should be noted that once FSRF target balance has been
achieved, the City should review the ABC user fee modeling to assess the rate changes
necessary to maintain legislative compliance.
Optional Po/icy Issue: Planning Po/icy "General Benefit"
The Planning Act defined DAAP process creates a primary economic benefit for
applicants. These applicants should therefore be expected to cover the majority of
DAAP costs through DAAP fees. However, a secondary or "general" benefit is also
enjoyed by existing development - i.e. the quality of life benefits inherent in a well-
designed community featuring properly conceived controls on development. It is
therefore possible to consider/model ongoing funding from existing development for a
minority portion of Planning Act DAAP (via property taxes). In some GTA municipalities
the concept of "general benefit" has been recognized by including all Planning policy
time in fee calculations and then discounting all fees - typically by :[5-20%. Other GTA
jurisdictions have not recognized "general benefit" at all in their DAAP fees calculations -
a position not supported by the consulting team. Pickering has opted to recognize
"general benefit" by excluding the majority of the City's planning policy time in the DAAP
fee calculations - thereby avoiding an across-the-board discounting of the fee schedule.
While the mechanism used to recognize "general benefit" is different in Pickering, the
modeling impact is similar - ongoing property tax support for policy activities that
significantly benefit existing development.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review- July 2005
,ATTACHMENT ~.._ ~> ,T~
24
4.4
Consolidated Full Cost Building Fee Calculations
(Including FSRF Contribution)
Figure 4-C documents the full cost components of the DAAP consolidated modeled fees,
including recommended Building Code Act reserve contributions.
IVlodeled direct/indirect/non-growth capital costs remain the same as the Figure 4-A "no
policy" scenario. Planning Act fees generate an annual under-recovery of $:[.239 million
based on historic modeled revenues of $262,293. This $1.239 million under-recovery
represents an ongoing potential property tax funded subsidy to Planning Act DAAP
applicants unless fee rates are adjusted. Without fee adjustments, this Planning under-
recovery results in 2006 budget exposure beginning January :[st 2006 because Building
Code Act surpluses are no longer available to cover the Planning Act shortfall under Bill
:[24. Therefore, Planning Act fee adjustments are relatively urgent from a fiscal
perspective.
For Building Code Act fees, the modeled ABC full costs and FSRF reserve fund
contribution of $:[66,406 (accumulated over 7 years) results in a $76,815 modeled
deficit when applied against historic revenue streams.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
2/
Figure 4-E Proposed City Planning Act DAAP Fee Schedule
Current Proposed
Fee Fees
I
Plan of Subdivision
- Base Fee _3~0_ 0 .... 10,~0~0_
- Per Unit Fee 50 135
_A rg~er~ent-Fe~ - ..... _3.,000~, .... i~
_- Ap~proval Pack~a~e F~e_e_~ .................. ~37_4~ ......... 37_4
- Assumption ~ Fee 1,070 1,070
- Clearance Release Fee .-~-~---~00~- ii ._~1,00~0
Plan of Condominium .... !z5_00 ....... 6,~5~0_0_
Minister Zoning Order
- Min~o[ 200 1,000
2 U__a_ j_or~ ................... ~ 00 _1 ,~6_0~0_
Site Plan
- Residential
- Base Fee 900 2,500
~- Agreem__ _ent~FF_e_e ..................... ~75._~. _7_5.~0
_7_P~er~Unit_ Fe_ e ........................ _65_ ..... !~5~
- Commercial
- Base Fee 625 2,500
- Agreement Fee 750 750
_- P~e_[_2_ 000~m~2~F.e_ e .............. ~5 ....... 8__50_0
- Industrial
- Base Fee 625 ..... ~,50~0~
- Agreement Fee 750
- Per 2,000m2 Fee - ...... ~00
- Revisions
_ Minor .... 250 750
- Major 625 2,500
Land Severance
- For Clearance of Conditions 300 300
- For Comment ............. 7~0~0
Minor Variance
- Existing Bu!lding 350 350
- Vacant Land 450 1,500
- Accessory Structure 200 200
_-_Tab ng_ 5~ 2~_0~_
- Special Meeting 75~ ____
Pickering Official Plan Amendment .... 3,5~0 8,0~0_0
- Recirculation 500 500
7ORM 0PA 500 500
R_eg ipna~1.9 f~!~ia~l .p!_a_ _n ?~me__~ ~d ~ e n~t 1,000 .... 5,0.
Part Lot Control By-Law
- Base Fee 300 525
_-?_e_bU_n i_t_F e e~ ...................... 20-35 .......... ~25.
Zoning By-Law Amendment 1,650 5,000
- Reci[culation 500 500
Zonin~l By-Law Remove Holdin~l Symbol 500 2,225
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
28
Figure 4-F Proposed City Building Code Act Fee Schedule
Proposed Building Fee
Schedule
Building Permits
Note: Other fees also being proposed for additional Bill 124 requirements (e.g. equivalent
authority).
4.6 Impact Analysis of Proposed Fee Increases
:In order to understand the impact of the modeled Planning Act and Building Code Act
fee increases, the consulting team has prepared an analysis that considers the complete
range of municipal input costs imposed on a new development unit. These municipal
sector input costs for a new development unit include City/Region/Education
Development Charges, Planning Act fees, and Building Code Act permit fees. Per unit
changes in the overall municipal input costs faced by an applicant (rather than %
change in isolated City proposed fee rates) provide the most meaningful impact analysis
from the perspective of both the applicant and the City.
Figure 4-G illustrates the impact of the proposed Planning Act and Building Code Act fee
adjustments on a typical residential detached unit in a 200-unit sub-division. The
modeled change in the subdivision and building permit fees ($247 combined impact per
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review- July 2005
29
unit) would represent a 1% increase in the overall municipal input costs actually
associated with this development scenario.
Figure 4-G _~mpact of Modeled Planning Act Fee ~Tncreases on a Residential Detached
Unit
Per Unit ~mpact on Single
ii. Detached Residential Unit
Based on a 200 unit sub-division
Figure 4-H (below) documents the impact of the "full cost" modeled Planning Act and
Building Code Act fee increases on a retail commercial property of 1,000 square metres.
Planning Act fees consist of Site Plan and Rezoning. Development Charges
(City/Region/Education) and Building permit are also deemed owing. Overall municipal
input costs increase by $7,010 or 9 percent.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
30
Figure 4-H Impact of Node/ed Planning Act Fee Increases on a Retail Commercial
Property
]:mpact on a
Property
Retail Commercial
Based on 2~000 ~cluare meter~
Figure 4-! (below) documents the impact of the "full cost" Planning Act fee increases
(full cost scenario) on an industrial property of 10,000 square feet. Planning Act fees
consist of Site Plan and Rezoning approvals. Development Charges
(City/Region/Education), Parks approval and Building permit are also deemed owing.
Overall municipal input costs increase by $8,475 or 3 percent.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
31
Figure 4-I Impact of Planning Act fee Increases on an Industrial Property
Impact on a Tndustrial Property
Based on 10,000 square meters
4.7 Inter-Municipal Survey of Development Process Fees
In establishing Bill 124 compliant Building Code Act fees and setting sustainable cost
recovery rates for Planning Act fees, it is critical that staff and Council understand the
positioning of its proposed fee structures compared to the municipal market. Figures
4-.1, 4-K, 4-L set out the fee structures of municipal comparators for a typical residential,
commercial and industrial property respectively. The development input costs in each
jurisdiction include Planning Act DAAP fees and Building Permit DAAP fees - as well as
Education and Region/City development charges.
The municipal development fees survey results point to the following overarching
conclusion:
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Pickering DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
32
Applicant development £ee input costs (including D/tAP £ee structures) do not
p/ace the City at a competitive disadvantage in any o£ the three benchmarked
development categories. Applicant location decisions are influenced more by
Development Charge input costs than DAAP £ees.
Across the survey it is important to note that some jurisdictions have recently adjusted
Planning and Building fees as part of their Bill 124 preparedness efforts, while others
have not. Known adjustments have already been made in Toronto, Vaughan, Brampton,
Milton, Whitby, Ajax, Halton Hills, and Burlington. Adjustments to DAAP fees are
imminent in a number of other jurisdictions or not yet known.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005
I
oo oo g o
8 8 8
o o o
~ I
I
I
I
r
I
r
I
I
I
i
I
I
8 § o 8 8
0 0 00 0 0
~E
E~
ill'."
0
I
II
I I
I !
I ·
Il
I I
I I
I !
· . o~c~oi o[
(~o~ ~r~)
eu!6ao~D
uolBu!~nfl
36
Overall DAAP Fee Review Conclusions
The activity based costing fees model prepared for the City has been used to calculate "full cost"
DAAP fees, in order to ensure compliance with Bill 124 and address a systemic under-recovery of
Planning Act application costs. These fees have been calculated within the City's new Excel based
model using 2005 budget data. Future Bill :~24 reporting requirements can be met by loading the
model with actual year-end data for the reporting period (initially at the conclusion of 2007).
Proposed Building Code Act fee rates (applied to historic volume levels) can accommodate 100%
of the ABC modeled operating costs, as well as the $:~66,000 annual FSRF contribution required to
achieve the proposed $1.16 million accumulation target in approximately 7 years.
Proposed Planning Act fee increases are necessary to avoid/moderate a "full cost" 2006 property
tax subsidy modeled at approximately $1.2 million.
The impact of the recommended DAAP Planning Act and Building Code Act fee increases can only
be properly understood by analyzing the impact of municipal input costs to new development on a
per unit basis. For instance, the recommended fee increase results in only a 1% increase in the
total municipal input costs for a typical residential detached unit. Overall municipal input costs
(driven by development charges and not DAAP fees) for this residential detached unit represent
less than :L0% of the overall price of a $300,000 house.
The impact of recommended fee increases on total municipal input costs for a typical retail
commercial property of 1,000 square metres is 9%. The impact on a typical industrial property is
3%. The driving factor behind municipal input costs for ICl development is not DAAP fees (current
or proposed), but rather the quantum of City/Region/Education Development Charges. A survey
of GTA and other peer municipalities reveals that the recommended DAAP fee increases will not
materially impact the City's overall fees "market" position in Durham or the GTA.
C.N. Watson and Associates Ltd.
Picketing DAAP Fees Review - July 2005