Albert Schepers

The applicant sought resolution of a dispute with the Chief Building Official regarding an alternative solution to use LAMCO-LFL laminated finger jointed lumber beams instead of laminated veneer lumber beams for a new two-storey house.

The Building Code Commission found that the proposed alternative solution did not provide sufficiency of compliance with the Building Code, as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the product was tested to Canadian standards or met the specific requirements for wood design, grade marking, and moisture content.

The applicant sought to use LAMCO-LFL Laminated Finger Jointed Lumber beams as an alternative solution to Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL) beams for garage door headers and a breezeway roof support in a new addition.

The Chief Building Official refused to process the alternative solution application because the product was not recognized under the Building Code or CSA O86.

The Building Code Commission found that, based on engineering reports and the limited structural application, the proposed alternative solution provided sufficiency of compliance with the Building Code.

The applicant sought to resolve a dispute with the Chief Building Official regarding the requirement for smoke dampers at air-transfer opening locations in residential public corridors of a high-rise development.

The applicant proposed waiving the requirement on the basis that the corridor make-up air system forms part of a smoke control system.

The Building Code Commission ruled in favour of the applicant, finding that the proposed air-handling system, which includes emergency power and firefighter override controls, sufficiently complies with the Building Code and permits the waiver of smoke dampers for noncombustible branch ducts.