City of Burlington Planning Applications Fees Review Community Development Committee Presentation January 14, 2013

Introduction  The City retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. And Performance Concepts Consulting Ltd. To undertake a full cost review of the City’s planning application fees  Intent of the review focused on: Section 69 Planning Act compliance Design refinements to fee structure; thereby ensuring “fit” with Burlington’s infill development future, as opposed to greenfield development past Ensure full cost recovery in fee categories where appropriate 1

Activity Based Costing Methodology Support Functions Site Engineering Zoning Examiners Overhead Functions Support Function “Cost Drivers” Overhead Function “Cost Drivers” Planning Application Fees Development Approvals Divisions Processing Effort Other Development Planners Overhead Function “Cost Drivers” Overhead Function “Cost Drivers” Support Function “Cost Drivers” Zoning Clearance Site Plan Rezoning Subdivision INDIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS

Process Steps Undertaken  Costing Category Definition  Processing Effort Estimation and Verification  Full Cost Review  Fee Structure Review 3

Costing Category Definition  38 costing categories considered within the review  Statutory requirements restrict cross-subsidization between application type  Costing categories were differentiated based on development type and complexity of the application process to better align processing costs with fee structure design Standard Application categories (e.g. Site Plan) Application sub-category variable (e.g. Major Site Plan versus Minor Site Plan application) Application sub-category variable (e.g. Residential Site Plan versus Non-residential)

Modeled Costing Categories 5 OPA + Rezone (Major) OPA + Rezone (Minor) Site Plan - Res Standard Site Plan - Non Res Standard Site Plan - Res Complex Site Plan - Non Res Complex Site Plan Minor Mod Site Plan Minor Dev Site Plan Major Revision Site Plan Minor Revision Rezone - Major Rezone - Minor Revision Rezone - Major Revision Zoning Clearance Single Semi New Previous zoning review from SP) Zoning Clearance Single Semi New (No previous zoning review for SP( ie. NEC) Zoning Clearance Res Acc Bldg) Previous zoning review from SP) Zoning Clearance - Non Res (Previous zoning review fro SP) Zoning Clearance Add'n Reno Res (No previous zoning review) Zoning Clearance Tents Zoning Clearance Pools Zoning Letter Standard Zoning Letter Fast Track Standard Condo Condo - Vacant Land Draft Plan Condo Condo Conversion H Removal NEC Parkway Part Lot Sign Variance Consent M Variance Consent + MV Rezone Minor

Processing Effort Estimation and Verification  Performance Concepts worked with City staff to prepare detailed data collection templates and compile staff processing effort estimates associated with the various costing categories  Processing effort estimates verified through capacity analysis and municipal benchmarking review that measures the reasonableness of estimates  Capacity analysis results are comparable to levels of utilization witnessed in other municipalities Development review unit at 62% Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment at 100% Zoning Examiner and Coordinator allocated 50% to zoning clearance/letters and 50% to planning applications

Peer Benchmarking Efficiency Test  Burlington staff processing effort for selected application categories (one-time effort per application) reviewed against peer municipalities  Greenfield municipal group  Infill municipal group  Burlington processing times generally falling between Greenfield comparators & Infill comparators  Consistent with City’s current evolution between the two urban forms  City processing effort benchmarking results pass the efficiency test…lends credibility to the accuracy of staff estimates 7

Full Cost Definition  Full cost recovery activity-based costing definitions: Direct costs – operating and capital asset replacement costs associated with individuals directly participating in the planning application process.  Operating costs include net service costs, e.g. salary, wages and benefits, materials supplies, contract services, etc.  Capital costs include annual sinking fund provision for facility replacement and Amanda IT system Indirect costs – operating costs associated with individuals supporting direct service departments  Includes cost for HR, facility maintenance, IT, insurance, governance, corporate admin., finance, legal and clerks  Consistent with assumptions contained in the City’s Building Fees Model

Full Cost Review  Full cost results calculated for each application costing category and compared with average per application fee revenue  Average per application fee revenue calculated by applying the City’s existing fee schedule to application characteristics for period (e.g. residential units, sq.mt. of non-res gross floor area)  Aggregate costing results based on average application activity levels for period

Full Cost Review Results

Fee Structure Review  Costing results suggest: OPA and Rezoning – cost recovery performance influenced by application size, with disproportionate recovery of costs from larger applicants relative to average cost Rezoning revisions significantly under-recovering costs of processing Site Plan applications disproportionately recovery cost of service from residential applicants, subsidizing minor development, modifications and revisions Subdivision applications historically have average 120 units. Application since 2009 have averaged approximately 30 units, suggesting greater rate pressure on smaller applications

Fee Structure Review  Costing results suggest: Condominium application effort not significantly different for exemptions than draft plan of condominium, with significant over-recovery of the latter Consent and Minor variance applications generally under- recovering processing costs Zoning clearance certificates require adjustment with higher increases for additions/renovation and accessory buildings Zoning letter significantly under-recovering processing costs

Fee Structure Recommendations  OPA/Rezoning: Reorient cost recovery toward smaller applications Base Charge  Major OPA/Rezoning – increase from $20,077 to $33,000  Minor OPA/Rezoning - increase from $15,054 to $21,760  Major Rezoning - increase from $11,810 to $18,760  Minor Rezoning - increase from $8,855 to $9,600 Variable Fee  Implement decreasing block fee for residential units, compared with $595/unit currently  0-25 units - $600  units - $450  101+ units - $300  Increase non-residential fee from $65/100m 2 to $95/100m 2 Revisions  Major – consider increase from $2,960 to maximum of $27,059  Minor – consider increase from $1,185 to maximum of $18,281

Fee Structure Recommendations  Site Plan: Implement a declining block fee for residential applications Base Charge  Maintain base charge for all applications - $5,910 Variable Fee  Implement decreasing block fee for residential units, compared with $595/unit currently  0-25 units - $210  units - $160  101+ units - $110  Maintain non-residential fee of $120/100m 2 Minor Development, Modification and Revision Fees  Minor Development – increase from $595-1,770 to $1,500-4,500  Minor Modification - increase from $1,385 to $3,000  Major Revision - increase from $2,950 to $6,600  Minor Revision - increase from $1,185 to $2,500

Fee Structure Recommendations  Subdivision: Reorient cost recovery toward smaller applications and implement declining block fee for residential Base Charge  Base charge for all applications – increase from $23,615 to $27,500 Variable Fee  Implement decreasing block fee for residential units, compared with $595/unit currently  0-25 units - $870  units - $650  101+ units - $220  Increase non-residential fee from $65/100m 2 to $95/100m 2 Revisions  Subdivision Revisions – consider increase from $1,480 to maximum of $8,600

Fee Structure Recommendations  Condominium: Implement full cost recovery flat fees  Draft Plan – decrease from $23,615 to $3,500  Common Element – increase from $2,813 to $3,500  Standard and Vacant Land - increase from $2,813 to $3,000  Condominium Conversion - decrease from $23,615 to $5,400  Committee of Adjustment: Consider implementation of full cost recovery flat fees  Consent - increase from $3,195-4,110 to $3,700-4,760  Minor Variance – implement following fee  Minor variance - $2,570  Complex minor variance - $3,560  Accessory building minor variance (i.e. Shed) - $860

Fee Structure Recommendations  Zoning Clearance and Letters: Implement full cost recovery flat fees by type  Residential Single/Semi – increase from $310 to $420  Addition/Renovation – increase from $95 to $420  Non-Residential/Multi-Residential – increase from $175 to $280  Accessory Buildings, Pools, Tents – increase from $95 to $200  Zoning Letter – increase from $95 to $200  Zoning Letter Fast Track – maintained at an additional $185  Other Fees: Maintain existing fees for H Removal, Parkway, Part Lot Control and Sign Variance Engineering Inspection Fees – SP increase from $670 to $1,060 and for MD increase from $215 to $385 Consider introduction of new fee for NEC approvals of $1,100 and OMB support fees Consider fee collection at time of application submission

Municipal Fee Comparison (300 unit Condominium, excluding DC)

Municipal Fee Comparison (300 unit Condominium, including DC)

Municipal Fee Comparison (25 unit Subdivision, excluding DC)

Municipal Fee Comparison (25 unit Subdivision, including DC)

Municipal Fee Comparison (4,000 sq.mt. Retail, excluding DC)

Municipal Fee Comparison (4,000 sq.mt. Retail, including DC)