Skip to content
You are here > Home > Your Ministry > Ontario Building Code > Appeals & Approvals > Building Code Commission > Rulings of the Building Code Commission > 1997 > BCC Ruling No. 97-22-564

Follow us

BCC Ruling No. 97-22-564

Email this page

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION DECISION ON B.C.C. #97-22-564

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

AND IN THE MATTER OF Article 9.10.14.1. and Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) of "the Building Code" (Ontario Regulation 419/89 as amended by Ont. Reg. 183/88, 581/88, 11/89 and 115/89)

AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Mr. John Russo, North York, Ontario, for the resolution of a dispute with Mr. Dave Potter, Chief Building Official, Richmond Hill, Ontario concerning whether the proposed window openings on the west of a 2 storey single-detached house at 68 Ellsworth Avenue, Richmond Hill, Ontario provide sufficiency of compliance with the Ontario Building Code.

APPLICANT

Mr. John Russo
Owner
North York, Ontario

RESPONDENT
Mr. Dave Potter
Chief Building Official
Town of Richmond Hill

PANEL
Mr. Roy Philippe (Chair)
Mr. Rick Florio
Mr. Ross Thomson

PLACE
Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF RULING
Tuesday, July 22nd, 1997

APPEARANCES
Mr. John Russo
Owner North York, Ontario
The Applicant

Mr. Frank Russo
North York, Ontario
For the Applicant

RULING

  1. The Applicant

Mr. John Russo has applied for a building permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 to build a two-storey single-detached house at 68 Ellsworth Ave., Richmond Hill, Ontario.

  1. Description of Construction

The proposed two-storey single-detached house is 4338 square feet with unprotected openings amounting to 20.3% of the west building face.

  1. Dispute

The dispute between the Applicant and the Respondent concerns whether the proposed window openings on the west side of a 2-storey single-detached house provides sufficiency of compliance with Article 9.10.14.1. and Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) of the Building Code.

  1. Provisions of the Building Code

Article 9.10.14.1. Maximum Percentage of Unprotected Openings

(1) Except as provided in Sentence (2) and in Articles 9.10.14.3. to 9.10.14.11., the maximum percentage of unprotected openings in an exposing building face shall conform to Table 9.10.14.A. or Subsection 3.2.3., whichever is the least restrictive for the occupancy being considered.

(2) An opening in an exposing building face not more than 130 cm2 (20 in2) shall not be considered an unprotected opening.

Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) Exposing Building Face of Houses

(4) Where the spatial separation between dwelling units on adjoining properties is registered on the titles of both properties, the spatial separation may be calculated as if the dwelling units were constructed on the same property.

  1. Applicant's Position

The Applicant proposes to build the house with window openings totalling 20.3% of the west side building face instead of the 7.2% permitted by the Building Code. The land on the west side is vacant and is partly under a conservation flood zone. As well, the Applicant deems that there are certain building restrictions on title on the adjacent land which would preclude the erection of any structure.

  1. Chief Building Official's Position

The Respondent deems that the Town has not been provided with information that Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) has been satisfied. The Town's records indicate that the adjacent lands are not under a conservation flood zone but are designated as Residential under the Zoning By-law. Furthermore, these lands are not owned by the Town or any other public authority. As a result, Article 9.10.14.1. of the Building Code applies.

  1. Commission Ruling

It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the proposed window openings on the west side of a 2 storey single-detached residential dwelling do not provide sufficiency of compliance with Article 9.10.14.1. and Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) of the Building Code.

  1. Reasons:

There are a number of options to address the % openings in walls facing property lines such as

i) The use of Sentence 9.10.14.12.(4) of the Building Code, as follows:

(4) Where the spatial separation between dwelling units on adjoining properties is registered on the titles of both properties, the spatial separation may be calculated as if the dwelling units were constructed on the same property.

ii) The protection of openings by closures having a 1 hour fire resistance rating such as fire shutters.

iii) The installation of sprinklers or wired glazing in steel frames as outlined in 9.10.14.6. of the Building Code.

Dated at Toronto this 22nd day in the month of July in the year 1997 for application number 1997-25

Roy Philippe, Chair

Mr. Rick Florio

Mr. Ross Thomson