Skip to content
You are here > Home > Your Ministry > Ontario Building Code > Appeals & Approvals > Building Code Commission > Rulings of the Building Code Commission > 1998 > BCC Ruling No. 98-35-640

Follow us

BCC Ruling No. 98-35-640

Email this page

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION DECISION ON B.C.C. #98-35-640

IN THE MATTER OF Subsection 24 (1) of the Building Code Act, 1992.

AND IN THE MATTER OF Sentence 3.3.1.9.(9) of Regulation 61, as amended by O. Reg. 400/91, 158/93, 160/93, 383/94, 20/95 and 395/96 (the "Ontario Building Code").

AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Ms. Mary-Jane Tushingham, Previous Owner, 7365 Martin Grove Road, Woodbridge, Ontario for the resolution of a dispute with Mr. Mani Navabi, Director of Building Standards, City of Vaughan, Ontario to determine whether the proposed design of a residential building achieves sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 3.3.1.9.(9) of the 1990 Ontario Building Code as it relates to the maximum length of a dead end corridor at 7365 Martin Grove Road, Vaughan, Ontario.

APPLICANT

Ms. Mary-Jane Tushingham, Previous Owner
7365 Martin Grove Road
Woodbridge, Ontario

RESPONDENT

Mr. Mani Navabi
Director of Building Standards
City of Vaughan

PANEL

Mr. Roy Philippe (Chair)
Mr. Michael Lio
Ms. Susan Friedrich

PLACE

Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING

August 26, 1998

DATE OF RULING

August 26, 1998

APPEARANCES

Ms. Mary-Jane Tushingham
The Applicant

Mr. Mani Navabi
The Respondent

RULING

  1. The Applicant

Ms. Mary-Jane Tushingham, Previous Owner, has applied for a building permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 for a six storey residential condominium currently under construction at 7365 Martin Grove Road, Woodbridge, Ontario.

  1. Description of Construction

The Applicant has applied to construct a six storey, 11,810 m2 (127,141 sq. ft.) residential condominium for seniors. The building is proposed to be of non-combustible construction with a fire alarm system and standpipe and hose system.

The applicant is proposing to create a dead end corridor of approximately 7.2 m (23.0 ft. 8 in.) on floors 2 to 6 by extending the corridor approximately 1.0m past the last suite entry, and by placing a door to an exterior balcony at the end of the dead end corridor.

  1. Dispute

The issue at dispute between the Applicant and Respondent is whether the proposed design of a residential building achieves sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 3.3.1.9.(9) as it relates to the maximum length of a dead end corridor of the 1990 Ontario Building Code.

  1. Provisions of the 1990 Ontario Building Code

Sentence 3.3.1.9.(9) Corridors

(9)In a residential occupancy, except for corridors served by a single exit as described in Sentence 3.3.4.4.(7), a dead end public corridor is permitted provided it is not more than 6 m (19 ft 8 in) long.

  1. Applicant's Position

The Applicant submitted they wish to receive a concession from 3.3.1.9.(9) as the corridor will extend approximately 1.2m (4 ft.) past the last suite entry on floors 2 to 6 on the proposed residential building. This situation places a door to an exterior balcony further than the distance allowable for a corridor having access in a single direction for exiting purposes. This situation and placement of the balcony door is not acceptable to the City of Vaughan.

In correspondence to the City of Vaughan, the applicant states that this situation has arisen because of certain restrictions that have been encountered on site due to plumbing rough-ins happening in advance of drywalling.

At the hearing the applicant proposed additional compensating measures including:

a)a smoke detector in each suite in the dead end,

b)a fire alarm audible device on the common balcony,

c)a zero hour rated fire door with self-closer and latch, between the balcony and the corridor, and

d)the prohibition of furniture and carpeting within the balcony provided within the condominium agreement.

  1. Chief Building Official's Position

The Respondent submitted that the a portion of the public corridor on the 2nd through 6th floors of this residential senior citizens' building has a dead end length of 7.2 m (23.0 ft. 8 in.).

The Applicant has requested that a 7.0m long dead end corridor be accepted in this building on the above noted floors in contravention with Sentence 3.3.1.9.(9).

  1. Commission Ruling

It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the dead end corridor in excess of 6.0m and additional compensating measures presented at the hearing do not provide sufficiency of compliance to the requirements of the Building Code.

  1. Reasons

1.The proposed dead end corridor measuring 7.2m long exceeds the requirement of 6.0m of Article 3.3.1.9.

2.The additional compensating measures including:

a) a smoke detector in each suite in the dead end,

b) a fire alarm audible device on the common balcony,

c) a zero hour rated fire door with self-closer and latch, between the balcony and the corridor, and

d) the prohibition of furniture and carpeting within the balcony provided within the condominium agreement, in the opinion of the Building Code Commission do not provide sufficiency of compliance.

Dated at Toronto this 26th day in the month of August in the year 1998 for application number 1998-45.

Mr. Roy Philippe, Chair

Mr. Michael Lio

Ms. Susan Friedrich