BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

Transcription

1 Ruling No.: Application No.: B BUILDING CODE COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF Subsection 24(1) of the Building Code Act, S.O. 1992, c. 23, as amended. AND IN THE MATTER OF Clause (2)(f) and Sentences (8) and (9) of Regulation 350/06, as amended, (the Building Code ). AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Paul Wright, ACI Wright Inc., for the resolution of a dispute with Jason Schmidt-Shoukri, Chief Building Official, City of Burlington, to determine whether the proposed configuration for the exiting from the second storey of a Group D and F, Division 2, two storey building, which leads through a lobby that is located within an interconnected floor space, provides sufficiency of compliance with Clause (2)(f) and Sentences (8) and (9) of Division B of the Building Code at 5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario. APPLICANT RESPONDENT PANEL PLACE Paul Wright ACI Wright Inc. City of Toronto, Ontario Jason Schmidt-Shoukri Chief Building Official City of Burlington Tony Chow, Chair Marina Huissoon Neal Barkhurst City of Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING September 9, 2010 DATE OF RULING September 9, 2010 APPEARANCES Jonathan Rubes Leber Rubes Inc. City of Toronto, Ontario Agent for the Applicant John La Selva Building Inspector City of Burlington Agent for the Applicant 1

2 RULING 1. Particulars of Dispute The Applicant has received a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992, to renovate an existing two storey, office building in order to convert it from a single tenant building to a multiple tenant building at 5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario. The subject building is a two storey, multiple use occupancy building with a building area of 2394 m². The building is comprised of non-combustible construction, and is equipped with a sprinkler system and fire alarm system. The subject building has undergone a series of renovations mainly to accommodate multiple tenants, which was previously a single tenant building. In the newly renovated building, two tenants are expected to occupy the first storey and a single tenant is expected to occupy the second storey. The two suites on the first storey are provided with two exterior exits, while the second storey is served with one fire-rated enclosed exit and the second required exit from this storey opens onto an interconnected floor space leading to the first storey through an unenclosed stair. The dispute before the Commission revolves around the exiting requirements from the second storey of the subject building. More specifically, the second required exit from the second storey, which passes through the interconnected floor space, is the focus of the dispute and whether the interconnected floor space between the first and second storey can be considered as a twostorey lobby. The Building Code permits exits to lead through lobbies under specified conditions under Article of Division B of the Building Code. The dispute focuses on whether the exit meets these conditions, and further, whether the stair within the lobby is considered to be an exit stair that is required to be enclosed with fire-rated construction. It is understood that in this case, the interconnected floor space in question complies with Sentence (6) and is permitted by Clause (2)(d) to contain a lobby. 2. Provisions of the Building Code in Dispute Exits through Lobbies (2) Not more than one exit from a floor area is permitted to lead through a lobby provided, (f) a fire separation, constructed in accordance with Sentence (1), is maintained between the lobby and any exit permitted by this Sentence to lead through the lobby, and Means of Egress (8) Except as required by Sentence (9) and permitted by Sentences (6) and (7), each suite in a floor area that contains more than one suite shall have, (a) an exterior exit doorway, or (b) a doorway, (i) into a public corridor, or (ii) to an exterior passageway. (9) Except as permitted by this Section and by Sentence (2), at the point where a doorway referred to in Sentence (8) opens onto a public corridor or exterior passageway, it shall be possible to go in opposite directions to each of 2 separate exits. 2

3 3. Applicant s Position The Agent for the Applicant submitted that the existing building was renovated under permit to convert the existing single tenant building into a multiple tenant building. The Agent explained that two tenants will occupy the ground floor and the third tenant will occupy the second floor. The Agent reported that the subject building has Group D and Group F, Division 2 occupancies with a building area of approximately 2400 m². The Agent also reported that the floor assemblies have a 45 minute fire-resistance rating and further, the vertical fire separations between the two ground floor office suites are rated with a 1 hour fire-resistance rating, although the Code does not require a fire separation between these suites. The Agent submitted that the two office suites on the ground floor are served by a minimum of two exit doors that discharge directly to the outdoors. The office suite on the second floor, the Agent maintained, is served by a 45 minute fire separated exit stair in addition to the exit through the lobby. Thus, the Agent purported, each tenant has access to two or more exits from the floor area, only one of which is through the lobby. Sentence (6) of the Building Code, the Agent submitted, permits the ground and second floor to be interconnected where the interconnected floor space is sprinklered and contains only Group A, Division 1, 2, or 3, Group D, Group E, or Group F, Division 2 or 3 major occupancies. In this case, the Agent pointed out, the lobby in the subject building interconnects the ground and second floors, the entire building has been sprinklered, and the interconnected floor space contains a Group D major occupancy only, thus, the interconnected floor space is in compliance with Sentence (6). Focusing on Sentence (2) of the Building Code, the Agent explained that this Sentence permits one of the required exits to be through a lobby. The Agent submitted that Sentence (2) requires the following: a) a lobby floor to be not more than 4.5 m above grade; b) a travel distance through the lobby to the outdoors must not exceed 15 m; c) rooms having direct access to the lobby not to contain residential or industrial occupancies; d) if the lobby is in an interconnected floor space, it must comply with Sentence (6); e) the lobby must conform to the requirements for exits except that rooms other than service rooms are permitted to open onto the lobby, and where the lobby and adjacent occupancies that are permitted to open onto the lobby are sprinklered, the fire separation around the lobby need not have a fire-resistance rating; f) a fire separation constructed in accordance with Sentence (1) be provided between the lobby and the exit that lead through the lobby; g) the lobby not be in an interconnected floor space if the exit through the lobby serves a hotel. The Agent reported that the subject building complies with each of the exit through lobby requirements as follows: a) the upper level of the lobby in this case is approximately 3.7 m above grade, which is less than 4.5 m; b) the travel distance through the lobby from the upper level to the exterior door on the lower level is 14.3 m, which is less than 15 m; c) rooms that open onto the lobby are offices (Group D) occupancies; 3

4 d) the lobby is in an interconnected floor space that complies with (6) as previously stated; e) the rooms that open onto the lobby are offices rather than service rooms and storage rooms, and on the basis the entire building is sprinklered, the fire separation around the lobby is permitted to be unrated; f) in this building, the second floor lobby is the means of egress as is the case on the ground floor. As such, there is no actual exit discharging in to the lobby for which a fire separation is required. The lobby itself only requires an unrated separation as per Clause (2)(e); g) the exit through the lobby does not serve a hotel. The Agent summarized, that as a result of the above, the exit through the lobby at the subject property complies with Sentence (2) of the Building Code. 4. Respondent s Position The Designate for the Respondent submitted that the construction in dispute concerns the second required exit from the second floor, which leads through a lobby that is located on the first floor of the subject two storey building. The Designate explained that the lobby is located at the front portion of the multi-tenant building. The Designate submitted that as per Sentence (1) of the Building Code, this building requires two exits from every floor. In this case, he reported that only two exits are provided from the second floor and one of the required exits leads through a lobby which is permitted under Sentence (2) of the Building Code. The Designate submitted that the Applicant has interpreted that the exit stair leading from the second floor through the interconnected lobby is not required to be enclosed by a fire separation. The Designate argued that Clause (2)(f) of the Building Code requires a fire separation to be constructed in accordance with Sentence (1) between the lobby and the exit permitted to lead through the lobby. The Designate agreed that a lobby is permitted to be located in an interconnected floor space however he suggested that the exit stair, leading from the second floor through the second floor lobby to the first floor lobby, is required to be protected from the lobby by a fire separation in accordance with Clause (2)(f). The Designate argued that the lobby needs to conform to the requirements for exits as required by the Building Code, except as permitted in Division B, Clause (2)(e). The Designate explained that in order to have an open exit stair from the second floor to the lobby, the exit in question would need to be separated from the remainder of the building by an appropriate fire separation having the requisite fire-resistance rating. The Designate submitted that consideration must be given to Sentences (8) and (9) for means of egress in floor areas containing more than one suite, where floor areas containing more than one suite shall not open directly into an exit. The Designate maintained that it is the City s position that although the Code permits a lobby to be located in an interconnected floor space, the exit stair from the second floor leading through the lobby is required to be protected from the lobby by a fire separation as per Clause (2)(f), and as such, the subject proposal not to separate the exit stair does not comply with the Code. 4

5 5. Commission Ruling It is the Decision of the Building Code Commission that the proposed configuration for the exiting from the second storey of a Group D and F, Division 2, two storey building, which leads through a lobby that is located within an interconnected floor space, provides sufficiency of compliance with Clause (2)(f) and Sentences (8) and (9) of Division B of the Building Code at 5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario. 6. Reasons i) It is the Commission s opinion that the pair of exterior doors located between the lobby on the ground floor and the outside of the building is considered the exit door for the second storey floor area. Therefore the set of stairs, located within the interconnected floor space containing the lobby, is not considered an exit stair but rather an access to exit and therefore, is not required to be fire separated from the second floor. ii) iii) Clause (2)(f) of Division B of the Building Code states, Not more than one exit from a floor area is permitted to lead through a lobby provided a fire separation, constructed in accordance with Sentence (1), is maintained between the lobby and any exit permitted by this Sentence to lead through the lobby. This Clause requires a fire separation between the lobby and any exit permitted to pass through a lobby. However, as stated previously, it is the Commission s opinion that the stairs within the interconnected floor space is not considered an exit stair and therefore, is not required to be fire separated from the second floor. Sentences (8) and (9) of Division B of the Building Code pertains to the means of egress from multiple suites within a floor area. The Commission heard that there is only a single suite located on the second storey of the subject building, therefore, Sentences (8) and (9) of the Code are not applicable in this case. 5

6 Dated at Toronto this 9 th day in the month of September in the year 2010 for application number B Tony Chow, Chair Marina Huissoon Neal Barkhurst 6