Ruling No.: 20-01-1552
Application No.: S-2019-34
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 Article 8.2.1.3 of Division B and Clauses 11.4.2.5 (3) (b) and (c) of Division C of Regulation 332/12, as amended, (the “Building Code”).
AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Eric Allen for the resolution of a dispute with Dave Fedoriw, Chief Building Official, to determine whether the proposal to use a Class 5 sewage system to serve the new addition to the existing cottage, provides sufficiency of compliance with Clauses 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) and (c) and Article 8.2.1.3. of Division B of the Building Code at 2 Island 3850 Georgian Bay, Part of lot 232, Georgian Bay, Ontario.
APPLICANT Eric Allen
Owner
Toronto, Ontario
RESPONDENT Dave Fedoriw,
Chief Building Official
Township of Georgian Bay
Port Severn, Ontario
PANEL Katherine Rentsch, Chair Designate
PLACE Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING February 6, 2020
DATE OF RULING February 6, 2020
APPEARANCES Eric Allen
Toronto, Ontario
The Applicant
Eric Gunnell, Gunnell Engineering Ltd.
New Market, Ontario
Agent for the Applicant
Dave Fedoriw,
Chief Building Official
Township of Georgian Bay, Ontario
The Respondent
RULING
1. Particulars of Dispute
The Applicant applied for a Building Permit to construct an addition to an existing cottage at
2 Island 3850 Georgian Bay, Part of lot 232, Georgian Bay, Ontario.
The construction proposed included an addition to the cottage, a replacement Bunkie, and the addition of plumbing fixtures.
The subject property is an island within the Township of Georgian Bay. There are currently 4 structures on the site, including the existing cottage, a shed, a Bunkie and a separate washroom (out building.) The buildings are currently serviced by a Class 5 sewage system consisting of 2 – 9,000 litre (l) holding tanks.
The Applicant is proposing to expand the cottage by 25%, convert the existing bunkie into a shed and construct a new bunkie with washroom. Water is supplied from the lake.
The proposed construction will increase the number of plumbing fixture units of the overall development and the overall floor area by more than 15% of the existing finished area.
The dispute centres on whether or not the proposal to use a Class 5 sewage system to serve the new addition to the existing cottage, provides sufficiency of compliance with Clauses 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) and (c) and Article 8.2.1.3. of Division B of the Building Code.
2. Provisions of the Building Code in Dispute
Division B, Article 8.2.1.3. Sewage System Design Flows partially states:
(1) For residential occupancies, the total daily design sanitary sewage flow shall be at least the value in Column 2 as determined from Table 8.2.1.3.A. (See Appendix A.) …
Table 8.2.1.3.A. Residential Occupancy partially states:
Residential Occupancy
Volume, litres
Dwellings
(a) 1 bedroom dwelling
750
(b) 2 bedroom dwelling
1 100
(c) 3 bedroom dwelling
1 600
(d) 4 bedroom dwelling
2 000
(e) 5 bedroom dwelling
2 500
(f) Additional flow for(2)
(i) each bedroom over 5,
500
(ii) (A) each 10 m2 (or part of it) over 200 m2 up to 400 m2 (3) ,
100
(B) each 10 m2 (or part of it) over 400 m2 up to 600 m2 (3) , and
75
(C) each 10 m2 (or part of it) over 600 m2 (3) , or
50
(iii) each fixture unit over 20 fixture units
50
Column 1
2
Division B, Article 11.4.2.5 Sewage Systems partially states:
(1) The performance level of an existing building is reduced where the existing building is extended or subject to material alteration or repair and a sewage system serving the existing building is adversely affected by the extension, alteration or repair of the existing building.
(2) Except as provided in Sentence (3), the performance level of an existing building is reduced where proposed construction will increase the occupant load of an existing building, and the new occupant load will result in the total daily design sanitary sewage flow of the building, calculated in accordance with Article 8.2.1.3., exceeding the capacity of any component of a sewage system serving the building.
(3) The performance level of an existing dwelling unit is reduced where proposed construction that,
(a) increases the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit,
(b) exceeds 15% of the finished area of the dwelling unit, or
(c) adds new plumbing fixtures to the dwelling unit,
will result in the total daily design sanitary sewage flow of the dwelling unit, calculated in accordance with Article 8.2.1.3., exceeding the capacity of any component of a sewage system serving the dwelling unit.
3. Applicant’s Position
The Applicant stated he owns the property at 2 Island 3850 Georgian Bay, Part of lot 232, Georgian Bay, Ontario. He submitted that the property currently has a cottage, bunkie and outdoor washroom on the property. The site is currently serviced with a Class 5 sewage system, for which a permit was obtained in 2015. The holding tank was installed and inspected and approved by the Township.
The Applicant explained that the original cottage (pre 2015) was serviced by an out house and leaching pit for the grey water. He submitted that in 2015 he obtained a building permit for a Class 5 system.
The Applicant stated that he currently has plans to modernize the cottage and is planning an expansion to the property including:
An addition to the existing cottage to increase the total finished floor area from 133 m2 to 166 m2
Installation of a washroom in the cottage
Installation of a new bunkie (20m2) to replace the existing bunkie (20m2); (The existing bunkie will be used as a shed.)
Installation of a 2-piece washroom in the new bunkie; and,
Conversion of the outdoor washroom from a composting toilet to a flush toilet.
The Applicant retained Gunnell Engineering to undertake a review and design of the new Class 5 system.
The Applicant and his Agent submitted that these proposed changes will reduce the performance level of the buildings, in accordance with OBC Article 11.4.2.5. Therefore, a capacity review of the existing sewage system was undertaken, in order to determine if the existing sewage system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the reduction in performance level.
The Agent submitted that the original Class 5 system (2015) was required to have a minimum holding capacity of 14,000 litres (L), based on a design flow of 2,000 litre per day (lpd). Two (2) interconnected 9,000 L tanks were installed for a total holding capacity of 18,000 L. The new design flow has been calculated to be 2,025 lpd, which would require a holding capacity of 14,175 L. The total storage capacity of the existing holding tank system is 18,000 L.
The Applicant indicated that they have applied for a subsequent permit for the Class 5 system, which has been denied on the basis that the cottage cannot be expanded with the use of the existing Class 5 system.
The Applicant indicated that the cottage is only for personal use, and the existing holding tank system is only pumped out once per year.
The Applicant also indicated that the Class 5 system installed in 2015, was oversized at the time to accommodate future additional flow and was intended to serve the current additions proposed.
In response to questions the Applicant confirmed that in 2014 an earlier permit application included the use of a Bionest sewage system. This alternative was abandoned due to site constraints and the required setbacks. In addition, the Applicant submitted that he would have needed to construct a retaining wall in the lake of Georgian Bay at a cost of approximately $150,000.
The Applicant’s Agent submitted that it was his position that the existing holding tank capacity has sufficient capacity required of a Class 5 system to service the proposed site improvements.
4. Respondent’s Position
The Respondent submitted that the municipality received a building permit application for expansion of the cottage and associated site works at 2 Island 3850 Georgian Bay, Part of lot 232, Georgian Bay, Ontario. The Respondent indicated that the cottage is currently serviced with a Class 5 system (holding tank).
The Respondent submitted that Clause 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) of Division B of the Building Code states, “The performance level of an existing dwelling unit is reduced where proposed construction that, exceeds 15% of the finished area of the dwelling unit”. In this case, the Respondent maintained the proposed expansion of the existing cottage exceeded 15 % of the finished floor area. As a result, the Respondent questioned whether the site could be expanded based on the proposal to use the existing Class 5 sewage system.
The Respondent indicated that the Applicant felt the original permit in 2015 was sufficient to support the proposed expansion. The Respondent subsequently reviewed the 2015 building permit application and noted several changes that would impact the performance level of the Class 5 sewage system.
The Respondent received an application for a building permit for the Class 5 sewage system to service the proposed expansion. These documents were considered to be incomplete as they did not include drawings showing the proposed construction, only the existing buildings.
In response to questions, the Respondent agreed that the existing Class 5 system has suitable capacity to service the proposed site expansion.
The Respondent’s submitted that it was his position that since the Applicant is proposing to expand the living space by more than 15%, as well as, add additional plumbing fixtures, which will reduce the performance level of the existing sewage system, the proposal does not meet the minimum criteria set out in Clauses 11.4.2.5 (3)(a)(b) and (c) of Division B of the Building Code.
5. Commission Ruling
It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the proposal to use the existing Class 5 sewage system to serve the new addition to the existing cottage, provides sufficiency of compliance with Clauses 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) and (c) and Article 8.2.1.3. of Division B of the Building Code at 2 Island 3850 Georgian Bay, Part of I. 232, Georgian Bay, Ontario.
6. Reasons
i) Clauses 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) and (c) of Division B of the Building Code trigger a review and assessment of the total daily design sewage flow and capacity of the existing sewage system, given the proposed construction.
The Commission heard that based on the assessment of the new total daily design sewage flow, the proposal did not exceed the capacity of the existing Class 5 sewage system.
The Commission further heard both parties agree that the proposed construction to the buildings does not increase the total daily design sewage flow beyond the capacity of any component of the existing Class 5 sewage system.
In addition, the Commission heard both parties agree that a Class 4 sewage system can not be accommodated on this site.
Therefore, it is the Commission’s opinion that based on the testimony and evidence provided, sufficiency of compliance with Clauses 11.4.2.5.(3)(b) and (c) and Article 8.2.1.3. of Division B of the Building Code have been achieved.
ii) The Commission notes that this ruling is specific to the facts of this dispute and property and the above reasons should not be interpreted as precedent setting statements.
Dated at the City of Toronto this 6th day in the month of February in the year 2020 for application number S-2019-34
Katherine Rentsch, Chair Designate