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 AND IN THE MATTER OF Sentence (1) and Clause (9)(b) of Regulation 403/97, as amended, the Building Code. IN THE MATTER OF an application by Cathy Lovett, Henderson General Hospital, for the resolution of a dispute with John Spolnik, Chief Building Official, City of Hamilton, to determine whether the vertical and horizontal riser piping for the proposed standpipe system which would not be protected with a two-hour fire rated separation, provides sufficiency of compliance with Sentence (1) and Clause (9)(b) of the 1997 Building Code at Henderson General Hospital Redevelopment, Phase 1, 771 Concession Street, City of Hamilton, Ontario. APPLICANT RESPONDENT PANEL PLACE Cathy Lovett Henderson General Hospital, Hamilton, ON John Spolnik Chief Building Official City of Hamilton Tony Chow, Chair Alison Orr Mina Tesseris Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING January 24, 2008 DATE OF RULING January 24, 2008 APPEARANCES Leszek Muniak Larden Muniak Consulting Inc., Toronto, ON Agent for the Applicant Lisa Simmons Building Engineer City of Hamilton Designate for the Respondent

2 -2- RULING 1. Particulars of Dispute The Applicant has received a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992, and is constructing a 6 storey addition to the east side of the existing building at Henderson General Hospital, 771 Concession Street, City of Hamilton, Ontario. The subject 6-storey building addition contains Group B, Division 2 and Group D major occupancies, is 36, 480 m² in building area, is fully sprinklered and contains a standpipe and hose system. As required by the Building Code, the building is comprised of non-combustible construction, contains floor assemblies with 2 hour fire separations, mezzanines with fire resistance ratings of not less than 1 hour, exit stairs that are separated from the remainder of the building by a 2 hour fire separation, and vertical service shafts that are separated from all other portions of each adjacent storey by a 1 hour fire separation. The structural fire-resistance ratings for the new addition are based on Article , Group B, Division 2, Any Height, Any Area, Sprinklered of the Building Code. The issue in dispute relates to the degree of protection that is required for the standpipe system riser piping in terms of fire-resistance rating of the enclosure surrounding the piping that serves the hose connections according to Sentences (1), (9) of the Building Code and NFPA 14 as referenced by the Code. Sentence (1) of the Building Code states that where a standpipe system is required, the design, construction, installation and testing of the system shall be in conformance with NFPA 14, Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems. NFPA 14, Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems requires that standpipes and lateral piping supplied by standpipes be located in enclosed exit stairways or be protected by a degree of fire resistance equal to that required for enclosed exit stairways in the building in which they are located. However, Sentence (9) of the Building Code requires that a standpipe riser be located in either an exit stair shaft or a service space. An exit stair shaft is a protected space that is generally separated from the remainder of the building with a fire-resistance rating. Therefore, when a standpipe riser is located in an exit stair shaft it is implicit that a certain level of protection for the piping will be achieved. Alternatively, a service space, as defined by the Building Code, may not be required, in certain circumstances, to be enclosed with a rated fire separation. The Building Code further defines vertical service space and horizontal service space and sets out the respective fire separation requirements in Article for vertical service spaces and Article for horizontal service spaces. In cases of conflict between the provisions of the Building Code and those of a referenced document, Article of the Code states that the provisions of the Building Code shall govern. The Applicant proposes that the vertical and horizontal riser piping for the subject standpipe system, without the protection of a fire rated separation from the remainder of the building, provides sufficiency of compliance with Sentence (1) and Clause (9)(b) of the 1997 Building Code. The Respondent, however, is of the opinion that the subject standpipe risers (vertical and horizontal runs) are required to be protected by a 2 hour fire rated separation in accordance with NFPA 14.

3 -3-2. Provisions of the Building Code in Dispute Standpipe System Design (1) Except as otherwise provided in this Subsection, if a standpipe system is required, the design, construction, installation and testing of the system shall be in conformance with NFPA 14, Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems (9) A standpipe riser shall be located in (a) an exit stair, or (b) in a service space. 3. Applicant s Position The Agent for the Applicant submitted that there is no definitive statement in the Building Code as to the actual fire resistance rating or protection required for a standpipe riser and that Article only provides a general reference for the standpipe system to be in conformance with NFPA 14. The Agent stated that NFPA in Section requires that standpipes and lateral piping supplied by standpipes be located in enclosed exit stairways or be protected by a degree of fire resistance equal to that required for the enclosed exit stairways in the building in which they are located. The Agent submitted that Sentence (9) of the Building Code requires a standpipe riser to be located in an exit stair or a service space. He contended that service spaces are not normally provided with a fire resistance rating equal to the rating of exit stairs and further, in various circumstances within sprinklered buildings, service spaces do not require fire resistance ratings. The Agent argued that based on the Building Code definition of a service space, which is defined as a space provided in a building to facilitate or conceal the installation of building service facilities such as chutes, ducts, pipes, shafts or wires, the service space is not required to be separated from the remainder of the building by a fire separation and thus, Clause (9)(b) was not intended to require a standpipe riser to be located in a rated shaft enclosure. The Agent maintained there is a conflict between the provision of the Building Code and NFPA 14. He argued that since Article of the Building Code states that in the case of conflict between the provisions of this Code and those of a referenced document, the provisions of this Code will govern, the provisions of the Building Code govern over the requirements of NFPA 14. The Agent contended that as Sentence (9) only references standpipe risers, service space is sometimes interpreted to mean vertical service space. The Agent argued that even if service space was interpreted to mean vertical service space, a vertical service space in the subject building would be required to have a rating of not more than 1 hour. Further, the Agent submitted that the fire resistance rating implied by the Code is being provided intrinsically through the fire protection of the water filled pipe, which provides sufficient thermal mass to provide the equivalent fire resistance rating to that required for vertical service shafts and therefore, provides sufficiency of compliance with the Code. The Applicant maintained that it is not the intent of the Building Code to require piping for standpipe systems to be separated from the remainder of the building in fire rated construction but rather to indicate where a standpipe riser is to be located i.e. an exit stair shaft or a service space.

4 -4-4. Respondent s Position The Designate for the Respondent submitted that the subject building is required to have a standpipe system as per Clause (1)(b) of the Code and that both 38 mm and 65 mm hose connections are required as per Article of the Building Code. The Designate contended that there were two ways to interpret Sentence (9). of the Code. One interpretation, she maintained, is that this sentence only indicates where the standpipe riser shall be located - an exit stair shaft or a service space. She argued that since there is no prescriptive requirement in Subsection of the Code for the value of protection, the user of the Code must refer to NFPA 14 for conformance. She submitted that Sentence (1) of the Code states, Except as otherwise provided in this Subsection, if a standpipe system is required, the design, construction, installation and testing of the system shall be in conformance with NFPA 14, Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems. The designate maintained that Article of NFPA requires standpipes to be located in enclosed exit stairways or to be protected by a degree of fire resistance equal to that required for enclosed exit stairways. In the subject building, she pointed out the exit enclosures are required to be protected by a 2 hour fire separation as per Articles and of the Building Code; therefore, it is her position that the standpipe risers are required to be protected by a 2 hour fire separation. The second interpretation of Sentence (9), the Designate explained, was that a user of the Code might again interpret the Sentence to indicate only where the standpipe riser must be located - an exit stair shaft or a service space. In this case, she maintained, a user continues to refer to Section 3.4. Exits of the Building Code for the equivalent rating of an exit stair shaft and Section 3.6. Service Facilities of the Code for the equivalent rating of a service space. The Designate argued that there was a discrepancy in the Code as to which value the user should use as the Code may require only a 1 hour fire separation for a vertical service space but require not less than a 2 hour fire separation for an exit stair shaft. She pointed out, in other cases, the most restrictive requirement of the Building Code would apply and therefore, in this case the standpipe riser would be required to be protected by a 2 hour fire separation. As a result, the Designate maintained, it was the municipality s interpretation that the entire standpipe riser, including both vertical and horizontal runs, be protected by way of either one of the interpretations described. The Designate, although agreeing with the Applicant s position that the Code may not be definitive as to the actual value of protection required for the standpipe riser, maintained that NFPA clearly requires protection, even in a sprinklered building, to ensure that the system is available to fire fighting personnel and building occupants in the event of a fire.

5 -5-5. Commission Ruling It is the Decision of the Building Code Commission that the vertical and horizontal riser piping for the proposed standpipe system which would not be protected with a two-hour fire rated separation provides sufficiency of compliance with Sentence (1) and Clause (9)(b) of the 1997 Building Code at Henderson General Hospital Redevelopment, Phase 1, 771 Concession Street, City of Hamilton, Ontario on condition that: a) The standpipe system riser piping, including all vertical and horizontal portions, with the exception of (b) below, shall be located within a service space. The service space shall be separated by construction having a one hour fire resistance rating on the outside of the service space. b) The horizontal portions of the standpipe system riser piping, located within the mechanical room in the basement level, where it is required to be sprinklered, do not have to be located within a service space. The sprinkler coverage in this room shall be designed to provide and increased density of water. 6. Reasons i. Article of the Building Code outlines the requirements for a standpipe system design. Sentence (1) states except as otherwise provided in this Subsection, if a standpipe system is required, the design, construction, installation and testing of a required standpipe system shall be in conformance with NFPA 14, Standard for the Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems. Sentence (9) of the Code requires standpipe risers to be located in an exit stair shaft or a service space. This provision of the Building Code supersedes any related requirements contained in the referenced NFPA Standard. ii. Adherence to the above noted conditions will, in the opinion of the Commission, achieve sufficiency of compliance with the provisions of the Code.

6 -6- Dated at Toronto this 24 th day in the month of January in the year 2008 for application number Tony Chow, Chair Alison Orr Mina Tesseris