BCAB #1339 - Classification of Seniors' Retirement Complex, Subsection 3.1.2
March 16, 1994
Re: Classification of Seniors' Retirement Complex, Subsection 3.1.2
The project in question is a three storey plus basement structure containing 35 "Personal/Congregate Care" units and 32 "Residential" Units. The "Personal/Congregate Care" units do not contain cooking facilities; meals are provided as part of the purchase agreement for the unit. Medical care is not provided to the residents. The residential units are conventional apartments falling within the definition of dwelling units.
Reason for Appeal
This appeal concerns the intended use of the building as housing for the elderly and whether the building should be classified as residential or institutional.
The appellant contends that although the building qualifies as a personal care facility under the Community Care Facilities Act a license is not required and has not been applied for. The residents of the building do not require "special care or treatment because of mental or physical limitations" as laid down in the definition of institutional occupancy. The appellant considers the building to be a Group C residential occupancy as defined in Article 188.8.131.52. because sleeping accommodation is provided and residents are not detained for medical care or treatment.
Building Official's Position
The building official maintains that the building is not a residential use because the designer has indicated that residents' health is expected to decline with age such that they would move from the residential units to the personal/congregate care units and that some will be in wheelchairs or bedridden and some may suffer from Alzheimer's Disease. Also, the project was given zoning approval based on it being a care facility which the zoning bylaw defines as "a building which contains sleeping units for persons receiving care or assistance which are licensed or funded.....under the Community Care Facilities Act.....Hospital Act".
Appeal Board Decision #1339
It is the determination of the Board, based on the intended use as described in the information provided, that the building should be classified as a Group C residential occupancy. The Board cannot rule on the possible future change of use or occupancy of the building nor can it address the issue of zoning.
George R. Humphrey, Chair