Skip to content
You are here > Home > Your Ministry > Ontario Building Code > Appeals & Approvals > Building Code Commission > Rulings of the Building Code Commission > 2013 > BCC Ruling No. 13-14-1342

Follow us

BCC Ruling No. 13-14-1342

Email this page

 BCC Logo 

Ruling No.: 13-14-1342
Application No.: B 2013-08

 

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 Sentence 7.4.6.4.(2) of Division B of Regulation 350/06, as amended, (the “Building Code”).

AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by John Nutter, WSCC 426, c/o Property Management Guild, for the resolution of a dispute with Ed VanderWindt, Chief Building Official, to determine whether the proposed to install backwater valves, each serving more than one dwelling unit, provides sufficiency of compliance with the technical requirements of Sentence 7.4.6.4.(2) of Division B of the Building Code for the Wentworth Standard Condominium Corporation No. 426 at 100 – 136 Neil Avenue, 3 Champlain Drive and 15 – 29, 35, 42 – 46 Greenford Drive, City of Hamilton, Ontario.

APPLICANT

John Nutter
WSCC 426, c/o Property Management Guild
City of Hamilton, Ontario

RESPONDENT

Ed VanderWindt
Chief Building Official
City of Hamilton, Ontario

PANEL

Tony Chow, Chair
Doug Clancey
Marina Huissoon

PLACE

City of Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING

May 16, 2013

DATE OF RULING

May 16, 2013

APPEARANCES

John Nutter
WSCC 426, c/o Property Management Guild
City of Hamilton, Ontario
Applicant

Ed VanderWindt
Chief Building Official
City of Hamilton, Ontario
Respondent

Patricia Douel
Building Engineer
City of Hamilton, Ontario
Designate for the Respondent

RULING

 

1. Commission Ruling

It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the proposal to install backwater valves, each serving more than one dwelling unit provides sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 7.4.6.4.(2) of Division B of the Building Code, when considering Part 11, for the Wentworth Standard Condominium Corporation No. 426 at 100 – 136 Neil Avenue, 3 Champlain Drive and 15 – 29, 35, 42 – 46 Greenford Drive, City of Hamilton, Ontario.

2. Reasons

  1. Article 1.1.2.6. of Division A of the Building Code provides the parameters regarding the application of Part 11 of Division B of the Building Code. It states that Part 11 applies to the design and construction of existing buildings, or parts of existing buildings, that have been in existence for at least five years. The Commission heard that the existing buildings were constructed more than 40 years ago. Therefore, Part 11 of Division B of the Building Code applies to the construction that forms the dispute before the Commission.

  2. Article 11.1.2.1. of Division B of the Building Code states that where an existing building is subject to extension, material alteration or repair, the proposed construction shall comply with Section 11.3. and the performance level of the building shall be evaluated and compensating construction shall be undertaken in accordance with Section 11.4. Section 11.4. requires the performance level of the building after construction to be not less than the performance level of the building prior to construction, and further requires that if the performance level of the building is reduced then compensating construction conforming with Subsection 11.4.3. is required.

  3. Article 11.3.4.1. of Division B of the Building Code states that notwithstanding Subsections 11.3.1. to 11.3.3, when an existing building is extended or subject to material alteration or repair, Part 7 applies to the design and construction of plumbing in the extensions and those parts of the building subject to material alteration or repair and to plumbing which is adversely affected by the extension, alteration or repair.

  4. Article 11.3.1.1. of Division B of the Building Code states that where an existing building system is materially altered or repaired, the performance level of the building after the material alteration or repair shall be at least equal to the performance level of the building prior to the material alteration or repair. Appendix A-11.3.1.1. states the philosophy and intent of Article 11.3.1.1. to be that after construction, the performance level of the building may remain the same, or be made better, but may not be made worse.

  5. Sentence 7.4.6.4.(2) of Division B of the Building Code states, in part, that a backwater valve may be installed in a building drain provided that it does not serve more than one dwelling unit. The Commission heard that the installation of backwater valves is voluntary and that the installation would not adversely affect the existing plumbing. Further, the Respondent agreed that the installation of backwater valves on the sewer drains serving each building would provide protection from backflow.

  6. The Commission also heard that an audible alarm system will be installed to warn the occupants of the building that the valve is closed and that the alert signal is continuous unless the valve re-opens or the alert signal is turned off by a plumber serving the valve.

Dated at the City of Toronto this 16th day in the month of May in the year 2013 for application number B 2013-08.

Tony Chow, Chair

Doug Clancey

Marina Huissoon