BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

Transcription

1 Ruling No Application No 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 Article and Article of Regulation 350/06, as amended, (the Building Code). AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Carlos & Victoria Pimentel, Homeowners, for the resolution of a dispute with Ann Borooah, Chief Building Official, City of Toronto, to determine whether that the as-installed prefabricated steel spiral staircase serving a mezzanine of a residential dwelling provides sufficiency of compliance with Articles and of the 2006 Building Code at 347 Sorauren Avenue, Suite 216, Toronto, Ontario. APPLICANT RESPONDENT PANEL PLACE Carlos & Victoria Pimentel Homeowners Toronto, ON Ann Borooah Chief Building Official City of Toronto Yaman Uzumeri, Chair-Designate Gerry Egberts Marina Huissoon Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING April 9, 2009 DATE OF RULING April 9, 2009 APPEARANCES Geoffrey Kendal Geoffrey Kendal Architects Toronto, ON Agent for the Applicant Sam Sarkhosh Building Inspector City of Toronto Designate for the Respondent

2 -2- RULING 1. Particulars of Dispute The Applicant has received an Order to Comply under the Building Code Act, 1992, to remedy certain alleged code deficiencies at 347 Sorauren Avenue, Suite 216, Toronto, Ontario. The subject building was an existing industrial building, which was renovated and turned into a residential complex. The building is 2 storeys in building height with 22 dwelling units located on the second floor and 26 dwelling units on the first floor. The floor area of each floor is approximately 2500 m². The dwelling unit which is the subject of this dispute has an area of 61 m². A mezzanine having a floor area of approximately 18 m² has been constructed within the dwelling unit without a building permit. The mezzanine is currently being used as a bedroom. A steel spiral staircase has been installed to serve the mezzanine; it is the only means of access to the mezzanine. The construction in dispute involves the installation of the steel spiral staircase serving the mezzanine. In particular, the Respondent is of the opinion that the steel spiral staircase does not comply with Articles and of the Building Code. The size of the subject building dictates that the stairs be designed in accordance with the provisions of Part 3 of the Building Code. Article of the Building Code permits the use of curved and spiral stairs provided the specifications for the rise and run are met. Article cross references Section 9.8 for the requirements for stairs, handrails and guards within a dwelling unit. Article provides the dimensional requirements for angled treads. The subject steel staircase is a spiral staircase with angled treads that has been installed within a residential dwelling. The stairs are not considered a required exit stair. The Applicant is of the opinion that the spiral stairs do not pose a hazard and therefore, meet the intent of the Building Code. 2. Provisions of the Building Code in Dispute Curved or Spiral Stairs (1) A curved or spiral stair is permitted in a stairway not required as an exit provided the stair has, (a) treads with, (i) a minimum run not less than 150 mm, and (ii) an average run not less than 200 mm, and (b) risers in conformance with Sentence (2) Dimensions for Angled Treads (1) Angled treads in required exit stairs shall comply with Article (2) Except as provided in Article , angled treads in other than required exit stairs shall have an average run of not less than 200 mm and a minimum run of 150 mm. (3) The depth of an angled tread shall be not less than its run at any point and not more than its run plus 25 mm.

3 -3-3. Applicant s Position The Applicant explained that six years prior, the subject spiral staircase was chosen due to the limited living space available in the 61 m² loft style dwelling unit. In particular, the Applicant pointed out that a straight run of stairs would have reduced the usable living space in what he considered to be, an already small unit. Further, it was his belief that the spiral staircase was now a centerpiece in the unit and an architectural feature of the loft. The Applicant submitted that the as-installed spiral staircase does not pose a life safety risk. He argued that the staircase has already been in place and in use for six years by him, his wife, five year old daughter, and visitors without issue or incident. The Applicant submitted that as the 18 m² mezzanine is very small, there are never more than two or three people on the mezzanine level at any one time. The mezzanine also has an open concept design so that any sign of smoke or fire could easily be detected. The Applicant also suggested that since the mezzanine is not very high from the first level, in the event of an emergency requiring escape or evacuation, a person could climb over the guard rail and jump down to the main level without injury. Alternatively, he argued, a person could use either of the two large windows accessible from the mezzanine which exit out onto a flat roof and therefore, could also be used as an area of refuge and escape. The Applicant also added that the unit was also equipped with 10 sprinkler heads, a smoke detector and a carbon monoxide detector. The Applicant submitted photos and dimensional specifications of the steel spiral staircase in support of his position. The Applicant conceded that the installed prefabricated steel spiral staircase does not strictly comply with the requirements of the Code; however, he is of the opinion that the staircase does not pose a hazard and therefore, complies with the intent of the Code. 4. Respondent s Position The Respondent maintained that the Building Code is very clear on the issue in dispute. He submitted that Articles and are applicable to the subject stairs, and added that the minimum and average tread runs were not in compliance. In addition, he stated that Sentence (2), of the Code requires that at least one stair between each floor level within a dwelling unit must have a minimum stair width of not less than 860 mm and that the subject stairs were in fact the only stairs serving the mezzanine and they did not meet the minimum specified stair width required by the Code. The Respondent also added that it was his position that the installed spiral staircase presented a tripping hazard and further, posed a life safety risk. 5. Commission Ruling # , BCC Application # B It is the Decision of the Building Code Commission that the as-installed prefabricated steel spiral staircase serving a mezzanine of a residential dwelling does not provide sufficiency of compliance with Articles and of the 2006 Building Code at 347 Sorauren Avenue, Suite 216, Toronto, Ontario 6. Reasons i) The Building Code permits the use of curved or spiral stairs provided the dimensional requirements outlined in the Code are met. The size of the subject

4 -4- ii) iii) iv) building dictates that it be designed to the provisions of Part 3 of the Building Code. Sentence (1) of the Building Code stipulates that the stair treads are required to have a minimum run not less than 150 mm, an average run not less than 200 mm and a minimum rise of 125 mm and a maximum rise of 200 mm. The Commission was advised that the subject stair treads do not comply with this requirement as the minimum run of the stair treads are 102 mm. Article cross references Section 9.8 for the requirements for stairs, handrails and guards within a dwelling unit. Similar to Sentence (1), Article also requires angled treads to have a minimum run of 150 mm and an average run of not less than 200 mm. As stated above, the minimum run requirement for angled treads within a dwelling unit have not been met. The Building Code is a set of minimum set of construction requirements for buildings with the primary purpose of promoting public safety. One of the objectives associated with Article of the Code is to limit the probability that as a result of design or construction, a person will be exposed to an unacceptable risk of injury due to hazards caused by tripping. In this case, the Commission was not convinced that the stair treads did not present a tripping hazard as per objective statement 3.1 of the Building Code. In addition, the Commission notes that as per Sentence (2), the Code requires that at least 1 stair between each floor level within a dwelling unit must have a minimum stair width of not less than 860 mm. The Commission was advised that the subject spiral staircase was the only stair serving the mezzanine and that the stair width was 762 mm. Therefore, the existing stair width is less than the minimum stair width required by the Code.

5 -5- Dated at Toronto this 9 th day in the month of April in the year 2009 for application number Yaman Uzumeri, Chair-Designate Gerry Egberts Marina Huissoon