Skip to content
You are here > Home > Your Ministry > Ontario Building Code > Appeals & Approvals > Building Code Commission > Rulings of the Building Code Commission > 1996 > BCC Ruling No. 96-27-510

Follow us

BCC Ruling No. 96-27-510

Email this page

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION DECISION ON B.C.C. #96-27-510

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

AND IN THE MATTER OF Articles 3.2.2.52. and 3.5.2.7. of the Revised Regulation of Ontario 1990, Regulation 61, as amended by O.Regs. 400/91, 158/93, 160/93, 383/94 and 20/95 (the "Building Code").

AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Mr. J. Nemeth, Project Manager, Magna, Aurora for the resolution of a dispute with Mr. Mani Navabi, Chief Building Official, City of Vaughan, concerning whether not sprinklering a non-combustible addition to be used for the shelter of scrap metal provides sufficiency of compliance with the requirements in Article 3.2.2.52. of the Building Code at the Rollstamp, 90 Snidercroft Road, Concord, Ontario.

APPLICANT

Mr. J. Nemeth, Project Manager
Magna,BR> 455 Magna Drive
Aurora, Ontario

RESPONDENT

Mr. Mani Navabi
Chief Building Official
City of Vaughan

PANEL

Mr. Roy Philippe, Chair
Ms. Susan Friedrich
Mr. Demir Delen

PLACE

Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF RULING

July 9, 1996

APPEARANCES

Mr. J. Nemeth
Project Manager
Magna
Aurora, Ontario
The Applicant

Mr. Steve Penna
Technical Supervisor
City of Vaughan
For the Respondent

RULING

  1. The Applicant

Mr. J. Nemeth, Project Manager, Magna, 455 Magna Drive, Aurora is the holder of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 to construct an addition to an existing industrial building for the purposes of sheltering scrap metal at 455 Magna Drive, Aurora, Ontario.

  1. Description of Constrution

The subject building is a one storey Medium Hazard Industrial Occupancy (i.e. Group F, Division 2) with a building area of 7702 m² (82906 ft²) used for the manufacturing of automobile parts. The building is also provided with a fire alarm system and an automatic sprinkler system.

The Applicant proposes to construct an unsprinklered 223 m² (2400 ft²) addition for the storage of scrap metal. The addition is partially open to the outdoors. There is a 2 hour fire separation between the existing building and the scrap metal storage addition.

  1. Dispute

The dispute between the Applicant and Respondent concerns sufficiency of compliance with the technical requirements of Article 3.2.2.52. of the Building Code. At issue is whether the proposed non-combustible addition being used for the shelter of scrap metal requires sprinkler protection.

  1. Provision of the Building Code

Article 3.2.2.52. Industrial Buildings, Division 2 up to 4 Storeys

  1. A building classified as Group F, Division 2 shall conform to Sentence (2) provided the building

    1. is not more than 4 storeys in building height,

    1. if unsprinklered, has a building area not more than the value in Table 3.2.2.T., and

    1. if sprinklered, is not more than twice the area limits of Clause (b).

No. of Storeys

Unsprinklered Maximum Area, m² (ft²)

Facing 1 Street

Facing 2Streets

Facing 3 Streets

1

3 200
(34 200)

4 000
(43 000)

4 800
(51 000)

2

1 600
(17 200)

2 000
(21 500)

2 400
(25 800)

3

1 070
(11 500)

1 340
(14 400)

1 600
(17 200)

4

800
(8 610)

1 000
(10 800)

1 200
(12 900)

Column 1

2

3

4

  1. The building shall be of combustible or non-combustible construction used either singly or in combination, and

  1. floor assemblies shall be fire separations with fire-resistance rating of not less than 45 min,
  2. mezzanines shall have, if of combustible construction, a fire-resistance rating of not less than 45 min,
  3. roof assemblies shall have, if of combustible construction, a fire-resistance rating of not less than 45 min, except that in buildings not more than 1 storey in building height, the fire-resistance rating is permitted to be waived provided that the roof assembly is constructed as a fire-retardant treated wood roof system conforming to Article 3.1.14.1., and

i. if unsprinklered, the building area is not more than

1600 m2 (17,100 ft²) if facing 1 street
2000 m² (21,5000 ft²) if facing 2 streets, or
2400 m² (25,800 ft²) if facing 3 streets, and

ii. if sprinklered, the building area is not more than twice the area limits of Subclause (i) (see Article 3.2.2.12. for supervised sprinkler systems), and

  1. all loadbearing walls, columns and arches supporting as assembly required to have a fire resistance rating shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than 45 min or shall be of noncombustible construction, except that such members and assemblies supporting a fire separation shall have a fire-resistance rating not less than that required for the supported assembly.

  1. Applicant's Position

The Applicant submitted that the buildings sprinkler system need not be extended to the addition. The addition is used only for the temporary storage of scrap metal from the manufacturing process and is open to the outdoors.

The Applicant stated that the addition is structurally independent of the existing building. The Applicant stated that there is good fire fighting access to the addition.

The Applicant proposed to install heat detection devices connected to the fire alarm system in lieu of sprinklering the addition.

  1. Chief Building Official's Position

The Respondent submitted that Article 3.2.2.52. of the Building Code requires the existing building to be protected by a sprinkler system. Therefore, the 223 m² addition must also be protected by a sprinkler system.

The Respondent submitted that in accordance with Sentence 3.2.5.13.(1) of the Building Code the installation of a sprinkler system must comply with NFPA 13.

The Respondent also submitted that NFPA 13, Sentence 1-6.1 states "a building, when protected by a automatic sprinkler system installation, shall be provided with sprinklers in all areas".

The Respondent stated that NFPA 13 does not require a sprinkler system for a canopy over noncombustible storage. The Respondent stated that this structure could not be considered a canopy due to it being enclosed on three sides.

The Respondent also stated that the building permit was issued subject to the addition being protected by a sprinkler system.

  1. Commission Ruling:

It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the unsprinklered shelter open on one side for noncombustible scrap metal storage provides sufficiency of compliance with Article 3.2.2.52. of the Building Code and the exceptions provided for sprinkler protection of exterior roofs or canopies in NFPA 13 provided that a 2 hour separation is provided between the existing building and shelter, and heat detectors connected to the fire alarm system are provided in the shelter.

  1. Reasons:

i. The enclosure is used only for noncombustible scrap metal storage.

ii. The shelter is open on one face and access for fire fighting purposes is provided by a fire route along the open face of the shelter.

iii. The shelter is separated by a 2 hour fire separation from the existing building.

iv. Additional heat detection for early warning is provided in the shelter connected to the fire alarm system.

v. It is the opinion of the Building Code Commission that the noncombustible storage shelter with one side open for noncombustible storage does not create an unsafe fire risk.

Dated at Toronto, this 9th day, in the month of July, in the year 1996, for application number 1996-34.

Roy Philippe

Susan Friedrich

Demir Delen